Physical violence: kicks, punching, beating with a stick or a belt, stabbing Psychological: imprisonment at home, isolation (not being

able to see or talk to anyone else), humiliating the woman in the presence of others, threatening divorce, verbal abuse, burning clothes, ignoring her. economic: cutting off maintenance, taking her money by force, banning her from going to work sexual violence: forced intercourse, forced abortion, accusing her of having an illegitimate relationship with another man physical violence is always accompanied by other types of violence (sexual, economic and/or psychological).

because the operation of women's power has been historically restricted to the the domestic realm, feminist feminist theorists have been especially attuned to the negative implications of defining familial relations as inherently nonpolitical and private. Feminist discussions of the public/private distinction are also particularly pertinent to the specifically gendered nature of domestic violence. Although men are occasionally victims of domestic violence, the evidence strongly suggests that the vast majority of victims are women. Many of the patterns associated with domestic violence are closely connected to gendered roles of domination and submission. Of particular relevance are the feminist theories who have explicity considered how the delineating boundaries of these spheres may be altered so as to decrease the incidence of violence against women within intimate relationships. one point characterized by significant agreement is that a dichotomy between public and private. Political theorists such as Carole Patement, Susan Okin have traced it from the ancient greeks through 20th century theories of liberalism and have been located in nonwestern cultures. A related point of consensus has to do with the assertion, that women are most closely associated with the private realm of family, child rearing and the performance of household tasks and men with the public spheres of ritual, culture and politics. The source of women's exclusion from the public sphere has been widely interpreted as orginating in the biological capacity to bear children. According Zillah Eisenstein, the capacity has been systematically transformed into a cultural expectation that women should be responsible for rearing their offspring. Nature is used to mystify this role and the "institutionalization of public/private domains on the poltical level" makes the role very difficult for the majority of women to escape. a problem associated with the designation of women as belonging to the private sphere is that women are frequently hurt in the private sphere. According to the American Medical Association, among women aged 15-44 battering is the leading cause of injury, outnumbering both automobile and household incidents. Furthermore because the abusive incidents leading to these injuries usually occur within a familial context, they are often assumed to be private matters that should not be subject to state interference. One of the consequences of such assumptions has been a pattern of non-intervention that according to many feminists, have served to intensify the vulnerability and isolation that many women experience within the

private sphere. Most feminists agree that a non-interventionist approach to domestic life has functioned to protect the privacy of men at the expense of the safety of women. Another criticism of the private/public split is that women are harmed by the distinction because of the exploitation and inequality they face in the private sphere. Although women now work outsidee the home, they are still expected by their male partners and by domestic society to fill domestic roles. Studies indicate that even in the most "liberated" dual-income couples, the women tend to continue doing the bulk of childcare and household activities. The double burden leaves women exhausted and the fact that men typically earn more and are better educated, produces the prerequisites for serious inequality in the home. Inequality within the domestic realm reconnects very closely to the cycles associated with domestic violence. Studies have repeated identified as one of the most powerful and and consistent causal determinants of the violence the abuser's belief that he has the right to dominate and control those subordinate to him. In addition to reinforcing such attitudes, inequalities in both th ehome and marketplace negat One of the most favoured defences of maintaining a strict separation between public and private is that given women's biological function as the bearers of children, the split if nothing more than an outgrowth of the natural order of things. As Eisenstein points out this conflates the physical act of the physical act of giving birth and the social act of rearing. the notion that women should remain primarily in the private sphere for the 15 to 18 years following the birth is social construction Aslso the public is influenced by the private sphere, or more commonly, that the private sphere is heavily regulated by the public sphere. Hooks: Initially feminist focus on domestic violence highlighted male violence against women but as the movement progressed evidence showed that domestic violence was also present in samesex relations, that chidren were also victims of adult patriarchal violence enacted by women and men. Patriarchal violence in the home is based on the belief that it is acceptable for a more powerful individual to control others through various forms of coercive force. This expanded definition of domestic violence includes male violence against women, samesex violence, and adult violence against children. The term "patriarchal violence" is useful because unlike the more accepted phrase "domestic violence" it continually reminds the listener that violence in the home is connected to sexism and sexist thinking, to male domination. For too long the term domestic violence has been used as a "soft" term which suggests it emerges in an intimate context that is private and somehow less threatening, less brutal, than the violence that takes place outside the home This is not so, since more women are beaten and murdered in the home than on the outside. Also most people tend to see domestic violence between adults as separate and distinct from violence against children when it is not. Often children suffer abuse as they attempt to protect a mother who is being attacked by a male companion or husband, or they are emotionally damaged by witnessing violence and abuse. Feminist focus on patriarchal violence against women should remain a primary concern. However emphasizing male violence against women in a manner which implies that it is more horrendous than all other forms of patriarchal violence does not serve to further the interests of feminist movement. It obscures the reality that much patriarchal violence is directed at children by sexist women and men. Adults who have been the victims of patriarchal violence perpetrated by females know that women are not nonviolent no matter the number of surveys

that tell us women often are more inclined to use nonviolence. The truth is that children have no organized collective voice to speak the reality of how often they are the objects of female violence. Were it not for the huge numbers of children seeking medical attention because of violence done by women and men, there might be no evidence documenting female violence. So far feminist movement has primarily focused on male violence, and as a consequence lends credibility to sexist stereotypes that suggest men are violent, women are not; men are abusers, women are victims. This type of thinking allows us to ignore the extent to which women (with men) in this society accept and perpetuate the idea that it is acceptable for a dominant party or group to maintain power over the dominated by using coercive force. It allows us to overlook or ignore the extent to which women exert coercive authority over others or act violently. The fact that women may not commit violent acts as often as men does not negate the reality of female violence. We must see both men and women in this society as groups who support the use of violence if we are to eliminate it.

Clearly most women do not use violence to dominate men (even though small numbers of women batter the men in their lives) but lots of women believe that a person in authority has the right to use force to maintain authority. Since masses of unemployed and working-class men do not feel powerful on their jobs within white supremacist patriarchy they are encouraged to feel that the one place where they will have absolute authority and respect is in the home. Men are socialized by ruling-class groups of men to accept domination in the public world of work and to believe that the private world of home and intimate relationships will restore to them the sense of power they equate with masculinity. As more men have entered the ranks of the employed or receive low wages and more women have entered the world of work, some men feel that the use of violence is the only way they can establish and maintain power and dominance within the sexist sex role hierarchy. Early on in feminist thinking activists often failed to liken male violence against women to imperialist militarism. This linkage was often not made because those who were against male violence were often accepting and even supportive of militarism. As long as sexist thinking socializes boys to be "killers," whether in imaginary good guy, bad guy fights or as soldiers in imperialism to maintain coercive power over nations, patriarchal violence against women and children will continue. In recent years as young males from diverse class backgrounds have committed horrendous acts of violence there has been national condemnation of these acts but few attempts to link this violence to sexist thinking. And it is especially vital that parents learn to parent in nonviolent ways. For our children will not turn away from violence if it is the only way they know to handle difficult situations. In our nation masses of people are concerned about violence but resolutely

do mandatory arrest and prosecution laws take agency away from women, and continue to treat them as inferior, or do they empower women to prosecute their abusers and facilitate equal protection under the law? Is justice served by sending abusers to jail when they are a woman's only means of economic support? The ways in which women are "socially constructed" by patriarchy take on particular significance in domestic violence, for women's choices are immediately shaped by patriarchal power, ranging from partners' violence to tacit endorsement of violence by police who do not arrest Domestic violence manifests a deeper patriarchal construction of gender, the coherence between the personality of many and masculine ideals of the romantic hero, yields the cultural acceptance of violence as a normal dimension of masculinity; the customary

expectations that women will take primary responsibility for household and childcare and will not work for an independent income, which is seen as men's responsibility, gives men economic power in the relationship. feminine ideals of women's responsibility for relationships lead women to internalizing blame for their victimization, and their reluctance to see assistance For many years, the central question about victims of domestic violence was why don't they just leave? Feminist research on domestic violence reveals that women's choices to leave or stay are seriously constrained by the social circumstances that define the extremely limited options available to battered women: police who do not arrest or courts that do not convict abusers. sexual discrimination in the workplace makes it more difficult for women to find and hold jobs that pay adequately to support single motherhood. When added to women's responsibility for childcare in the family, women's economic dependence on their batterers may make it impractical for women to exit abusive relationships. social stigma and shame also inhibit women from seeking help. At the same time, social construction of masculinity, which may push men towards violent behaviour and push women to accept such behaviour as normal, complicates political philosophical issues of freedom, choice, autonomy and responsibility.