MASCULINITY IDEOLOGY AND THREAT TO MANHOOD AS PRECURSORS OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN IN TURKEY

Year 2019, Volume: 6 Issue: 1, 183 - 207, 09.05.2019

Beril Türkoğlu , Banu Cingöz-ulu

Abstract

This study aims to
explore the effect of masculinity ideology (MI) and the threat to manhood (TM) on violence against women (VAW) in Turkey by
testing two mediational models. The data is collected from a community sample
via by using quantitative research methods. The first model tests the effect of
MI on attitudes towards VAW through TM. A second one, employing a group of
non-single men, tests the effect of MI on the frequency of actual perpetration of
violence through TM and attitudes towards VAW. Endorsement of MI predicts tolerant
attitudes towards VAW through perceived TM. These tolerant attitudes towards
VAW, in turn, predict its actual perpetration. We discuss the implications of
these results from a social psychological
perspective regarding how the broader ideologies of patriarchy and masculinity
trickle down to individual level violence towards one’s partner.

Keywords

masculinity ideology, precarious manhood, threat, manhood, violence against women, male role norms

References

• Aba, Y. A. (2008). Çatışmaların Çözümüne Yaklaşım Ölçeğinin Üniversite Öğrencilerinde Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). Akdeniz Üniversitesi, Antalya.
• Adjei, S. B. (2016). Masculinity and spousal violence: Discursive accounts of husbands who abuse their wives in Ghana. Journal of Family Violence, 31(4), 411–422. doi:10.1007/s10896-015-9781-z
• Anderson, K. (1997). Gender, status, and domestic violence: An integration of feminist and family violence approaches. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59(3), 655–669. doi:10.2307/353952
• Arat, Y., & Altınay, G. A. (2007). Türkiye’de kadına yönelik şiddet [Violence against women in Turkey]. Istanbul: Punto Press.
• Atay, T. (2004). “Erkeklik” en çok erkeği ezer [Masculinity oppress the men most]. Toplum ve Bilim, 101, 11-30.
• Babl, J. D. (1979). Compensatory masculine responding as a function of sex role. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47(2), 252–257. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.47.2.252
• Baumeister, R. F., Smart, L., & Boden, J. M. (1996). Relation of threatened egotism to violence and aggression: the dark side of high self-esteem. Psychological Review, 103(1), 5–33. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.103.1.5
• Bolak-Boratav, H., Okman-Fişek, G., & Eslen-Zİya, H. (2017). Erkekliğin Türkiye halleri [Masculinities in Turkey](1st ed.). İstanbul: İstanbul Bilgi University Publications.
• Bosson, J. K., Vandello, J. A., Burnaford, R. M., Weaver, J. R., & Wasti, S.A. (2009). Precarious manhood and displays of physical aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35(5), 623–634. doi:10.1177/0146167208331161
• Brannon, R. (1976). The male sex role: Our culture’s blueprint for manhood, what it’s done for us lately. In D. David & R. Brannon (Eds.), The forty-nine percent majority: The male sex role (pp. 1–49). Reading: Addison-Wesley.
• Ceylan, S. (2016). Social psychological predictors of violence against women in honor cultures (Unpublished Doctoral Thesis). Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
• Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
• Çelik, G. (2017). Öldüren erkeklikler: Eşine şiddet uygulamış cezaevindeki erkekler [Killer masculinities]. Nota Bene Yayınları.
• Doğan, R. (2014). The profiles of victims, perpetrators, and unfounded beliefs in honor killings in Turkey. Homicide Studies, 18(4), 389–416. doi:10.1177/1088767914538637
• Douki, S., Nacef, F., Belhadj, A., Bouasker, A, & Ghachem, R. (2003). Violence against women in Arab and Islamic countries. Archives of Women’s Mental Health, 6(3), 165–171. doi:10.1007/s00737-003-0170-x
• Eisler, R. M., & Skidmore, J. R. (1987). Masculine gender role stress: Scale development and component factors in the appraisal of stressful situations. Behavior Modification, 11, 123–136. doi:10.1177/01454455870112001
• Ercan, N. (2009). The predictors of attitudes toward physical wife abuse: ambivalent sexism, system justification, and religious orientation. (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
• Ezzell, M. B. (2012). “I’m in control”: Compensatory manhood in a therapeutic community. Gender & Society, 26(2), 190–215. doi:10.1177/0891243211434611
• Franchina, J. J., Eisler, R. M., & Moore, T. M. (2001). Masculine gender role stress and intimate abuse: Effects of masculine gender relevance of dating situations and female threat on men’s attributions and affective responses. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 2(1), 34–41. doi:10.1037/1524-9220.2.1.34
• Gallagher, K. E., & Parrott, D. J. (2011). What accounts for men’s hostile attitudes toward women? The influence of hegemonic male role norms and masculine gender role stress. Violence against Women, 17(5), 568–583. doi:10.1177/1077801211407296
• Gharaibeh, M. K., Abu-Baker, N. N., & Aji, S. (2012). Attitudes toward and justification for wife abuse among Syrian medical and nursing students. Journal of Transcultural Nursing, 23, 297–305. doi:10.1177/1043659612441022
• Gilmore, D. (1990). Manhood in the making. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
• Girit, S. (06.11.2015). ‘Erkekliğime dokundu’ savunması ve kadına şiddet davaları [‘Insult to manhood defense and cases of violence against women]. Retrieved: 20.10.2018. https://www.bbc.com/turkce/haberler/2015/11/151106_turkiye_kadin_cinayetleri
• Glick, P., Sakalli-Ugurlu, N., Ferreira, M. C., & Aguiar de Souza, M. (2002). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward wife abuse in Turkey and Brazil. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26(4), 292–297. Doi:10.1111/1471-6402.t01-1-00068
• Groes-Green, C. (2009). Hegemonic and subordinated masculinities: Class, violence and sexual performance among young Mozambican men. Nordic Journal of African Studies, 18(4), 286–304. Retrieved from http://www.njas.helsinki.fi/pdf-files/vol18num4/groes-green.pdf
• Gölge, Z. B., Sanal, Y., Yavuz, S., & Arslanoğlu-Çetin, E. (2016). Attitudes toward wife abuse of police officers and judiciary members in Turkey: Profession, gender, ambivalent sexism, and sex roles. Journal of Family Violence, 31(6), 785–796. doi:10.1007/s10896-016-9823-1
• Haj-Yahia, M. M. (2000). Wife abuse and battering in the social context of Arab society. Family Process, 39, 237–255. doi:10.1111/j.1545-5300.2000.39207.x
• Haj-Yahia, M. M. (2005). Can people’s patriarchal ideology predict their beliefs about wife abuse? The case of Jordanian men. Journal of Community Psychology, 33(5), 545–567. doi:10.1002/jcop.20068
• Haj-Yahia, M. M., Sousa, C., Alnabilsy, R., & Elias, H. (2015). The influence of Palestinian physicians’ patriarchal ideology and exposure to family violence on their beliefs about wife beating. Journal of Family Violence, 30(3), 263–276. doi:10.1007/s10896-015-9671-4
• Haj-Yahia, M. M., & Uysal, A. (2008). Beliefs about wife beating among medical students from Turkey. Journal of Family Violence, 23(2), 119–133. Doi:10.1007/s10896-007-9134-7
• Hayes, A. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: The Guilford Press. Hegland
• HÜNEE [Hacettepe Üniversitesi Nüfus Etütleri Enstitü( Hacettepe University Institute of Population Studies)] (2015). Türkiye’de kadına yönelik aile içi şiddet [Domestic violence in Turkey]. Ankara: Elma Teknik Press.
• Hürriyet, (04.11.2015). Müzisyen Değer Deniz’in katili: Sözleri erkekliğime dokundu, öldürdüm: Erişim tarihi: 20.10.2018, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/muzisyen-deger-denizin-katili-sozleri-erkekligime-dokundu-oldurdum-40009940
• Jakupcak, M., Lisak, D., & Roemer, L. (2002). The role of masculinity ideology and masculine gender role stress in men’s perpetration of relationship violence. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 3(2), 97–106. doi:10.1037//1524-9220.3.2.97
• Kandemirci, D. (2014). Kadına Yönelik Aile İçi Şiddetle Baş Etme : Çok Boyutlu Bir İnceleme. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 17(33), 1–12.
• Kandiyoti, D. (1995). Patterns of patriarchy: Notes for an analysis of male dominance in Turkish society. In Ş. Tekeli (Ed.), Women in modern Turkish society. (pp. 306-317) London: Zed Books.
• Lease, S. H., Çiftçi, A., Demir, A., & Boyraz, G. (2009). Structural validity of Turkish versions of the gender role conflict scale and male role norms scale. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 10(4), 273–287. doi: 10.1037/a0017044
• Macmillan, R., & Kruttschnitt, C. (2005). Patterns of violence against women: Risk factors and consequences: Final report. The University of Minnesota, Department of Sociology.
• Mahalik, J. R., Locke, B. D., Ludlow, L. H., Diemer, M. A., Scott, R. P. J., Gottfried, M., et al. (2003). Development of the conformity to masculine norms inventory. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 4(1), 3-25. doi: 10.1037/1524-9220.4.1.3
• Malamuth, N. M. (1986). Predictors of naturalistic sexual aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 953–962. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.5.953
• Messerschmidt, J. W. (1993). Masculinities and crime: Critique and reconceptualization of theory. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
• Michniewicz, K. S., Vandello, J. A., & Bosson, J. K. (2014). Men’s (mis)perceptions of the gender threatening consequences of unemployment. Sex Roles, 70(3–4), 88–97. doi:10.1007/s11199-013-0339-3
• Miedzian, M. (1991). Boys will be boys: Breaking the link between masculinity and violence. New York, NY: Doubleday.
• Moore, T. M., & Stuart, G. L. (2005). A Review of the Literature on Masculinity and Partner Violence. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 6(1), 46–61. doi:10.1037/1524-9220.6.1.46
• Moore, T. M., Stuart, G. L., McNulty, J. K., Addis, M. E., Cordova, J. V., & Temple, J. R. (2008). Domains of masculine gender role stress and intimate partner violence in a clinical sample of violent men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 9(2), 82–89. doi:10.1037/1524-9220.9.2.82
• Naved, R. T., Huque, H., Farah, S., & Shuvra, M. M. R. (2011). Men’s attitude and practices regarding gender and violence against women in Bangladesh: Preliminary findings. Print Link Printers. doi:10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2
• Nayak, M. B., Byrne, C. a., Martin, M. K., & Abraham, A. G. (2003). Attitudes Toward Violence against Women: A Cross-Nation Study. Sex Roles, 49(7-8), 333–342. doi:10.1023/A:1025108103617
• Nisbett, R. E., & Cohen, D. (1996). Culture of honor: Psychology of violence in the south. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
• Onur, H., & Koyuncu, B. (2004). “Hegemonik” erkekliğin görünmeyen yüzü. Toplum ve Bilim, 101, 31–49.
• Orme, J., Dominelli, L., & Mullender, A. (2000). Working with violent men from a feminist social work perspective. International Social Work, 43(1), 89-105. doi:10.1177/a010523
• Ortabag, T., Ozdemir, S., Bebis, H., & Ceylan, S. (2014). Perspectives of young adult men regarding violence against women: A cross-sectional study from Turkey. Journal of Family Violence, 29(6), 665–674. doi:10.1007/s10896-014-9617-2
• Page, A. Z., & İnce, M. (2008). Aile İçi Şiddet Konusunda Bir Derleme. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 11(22), 81–94.
• Pleck, J. H. (1976). The male sex role: Definitions, problems, and sources of change. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 155-164.
• Pleck, J. (1995). The gender role strain paradigm: An update. In R. F. Levant & W. S. Pollack (Eds.), A new psychology of men (pp. 11–32). New York, NY, US: Basic Books. doi:10.17763/haer.41.1.91367v0h80051573
• Pleck, J. H. & Sawyer, J. (1974). Men and masculinity. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Próspero, M. (2008). Effects of masculinity, sex, and control on different types of intimate partner violence perpetration. Journal of Family Violence, 23(7), 639–645. doi:10.1007/s10896-008-9186-3
• Sakallı, N. (2001). Beliefs about wife beating among Turkish college students: The effects of patriarchy, sexism, and sex differences. Sex Roles, 44(9), 599-610. doi:10.1177/a01052310.1023/A:1012295109711
• Sakallı-Uğurlu, N., & Akbaş, G. (2013). Namus kültürlerinde “namus” ve “namus adına kadına şiddet”: Sosyal psikolojik açıklamalar. [“Honor” and “honor violence against women” in honor cultures: Social psychological explanations] Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 16(32), 76–91.
• Sakallı-Uğurlu, N., Türkoğlu, B. ve Kuzlak, A. (2018). Gender stereotypes in contemporary Turkey: What are the pictures of women and men? Nesne Psikoloji Dergisi, 6(13), 309-336. doi: 10.7816/nesne-06-13-04
• Sancar, S. (2009). Erkeklik: İmkansız iktidar, ailede, piyasada, sokakta erkekler. Istanbul: Metis Press.
• Schmitt, M. T., & Branscombe, N. R. (2001). The good, the bad, and the manly: Threats to one’s prototypicality and evaluations of fellow in-group members. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37(6), 510–517. doi:10.1006/jesp.2001.1476.
• Selek, P. (2008). Sürüne sürüne erkek olmak. İstanbul: İletişim Press.
• Straus, M. A, & Gelles, R. J. (1986). Societal change and change in family violence from 1975 to 1985 as revealed by two national surveys. Journal of Marriage and the Family. doi:10.2307/352033.
• Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., & Sugarman, D. B. (1996). The revised conflict tactics scale (CTS2): Development and preliminary psychometric data. Journal of Family Issues, 17(3), 283–316. http://doi.org/0803973233
• Sukhu, R. L. M. (2013). Masculinity and men’s violence against known women in Trinidad--whose responsibility? Men and Masculinities, 16(1), 71–92. doi:10.1177/1097184X12468102
• Thompson, E. H. J., & Bennett, K. M. (2015). Response to commentaries on masculinity ideologies. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 16(2), 145–148. doi:10.1037/a0039083
• Thompson, E. H., & Pleck, J. H. (1986). The structure of male role norms. American Behavioral Scientist, 29, 531–543. doi:10.1177/000276486029005003
• Türkiye Büyük Millet Meclisi (Turkish Grant National Assembly), (2015). Kadına yönelik şiddetin sebeplerinin araştırılarak alınması gereken önlemlerin belirlenmesi amacıyla kurulan meclis araştırma komisyonu raporu [Report related to reasons of violence against women and determining prevention strategies], Turkey.
• Türkoğlu, B. (2013b). Violence as a way of reconstructing manhood: The role of threatened manhood and masculinity ideology on violence against women (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
• Vandello, J. A., & Bosson, J. K (2013). Hard won easily lost: A review and synthesis of theory and research on precarious manhood. Psychology of Men and Masculinity, 14 (2), 101-113. doi: 10.1037/a0029826
• Vandello, J. A., Bosson, J. K., Cohen, D., Burnaford, R. M., & Weaver, J. R. (2008). Precarious manhood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(6), 1325–1339. doi:10.1037/a0012453.
• Vandello, J., & Cohen, D. (2003). Male honor and female fidelity: Implicit cultural scripts that perpetuate domestic violence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(5), 997–1010. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.5.997.
• Vandello, J., & Cohen, D. (2008). Culture, gender, and men’s intimate partner violence. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(2), 652–667. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2008.00080.x.
• Weldon, S., & Gilchrist, E. (2012). Implicit theories in intimate partner violence offenders. Journal of Family Violence, 27(8), 761–772. doi:10.1007/s10896-012-9465-x
• Whiting, J. B., Parker, T. G., & Houghtaling, A. W. (2014). Explanations of a Violent Relationship: The Male Perpetrator’s Perspective. Journal of Family Violence, 29(3), 277–286. doi:10.1007/s10896-014-9582-9
• Yigzaw, T., Berhane, Y., Deyessa, N., & Kaba, M. (2010). Perceptions and attitude towards violence against women by their spouses: A qualitative study in Northwest Ethiopia. Ethiopian Journal of Health Development, 24(1), 39-45. doi:10.4314/ejhd.v24i1.62943