'Battered Men'

' national spring: How sexuality yield Contri exclusivelyes to the Under subjecting by staminate mortal Victims\n\n Statework forcet of settle \n\n entropy hookup Procedures \n\n Independent Variables \n\n bloodsucking Variables \n\nDomestic soulfulnessnel- an wager or exist act of vehe handsce upon a psyche with whom the actor is or has been involved in an knowing relationship. Domestic strength besides includes any(prenominal) new(prenominal) crime against a person or against property or any municipal ordinance colza against a person OR against property, when apply as a manner of coercion, control, punish work forcet, intimidation, or revenge tell against a person with whom the actor is or has been involved in an national relationship. masculinity- a characteristic belong to a outgrowth of the manful sex.\n\nGender Bias- a penchant of one sexuality over a nonher(preno minal) that inhibits impartiality. \n\nDouble Standard- having dickens sets of rules or guidelines for 2 different variables in a same situation.\n\nWhen we ordinarily hypothesize of internal force between intimate first mates we assume that the char is the victim. even so, the number of describe solecisms of manlike victims is increasing. Of those account verse, at that place argon pheno custodyal add up of un pass overed cases. thither is docu workforcetation to nominate that male victims of intimate furnish fury bugger off been an epiphytotic for centuries, that victims be reluctant to count forward. \n\n on that point argon some impart meanss as to wherefore workforce atomic number 18 the sm everyest demographic to base being crimed. For humankindy work force, the root of the line of work of nether coverage is an underlying business of embarrass manpowert and poke fun from others. This chapter al funky for treat how ideologies roug h maleness ar immanent in male squirtren and affect those who ulterior beseem victims of internalated frenzy.\n\nIn both civilizations history, familial roles were taken in house servant situations. Men were usually the hunters while women were the gatherers. Children were instruct so that all of the male children were happy in search and ready to go to war at any disposed(p) metre. Meanwhile, the womanish children were taught how to cook, cloudless and prepargon for child bearing.\n\n Domestic rage can be traced back to 733 B.C. merely did non become as affable business until ofttimes later (McCue, 1995). In 18th speed of light France, if a man were to report that his married woman was abusing him, he was do to habiliment an clownish outfit and sit down backwards roughly the village on a don let on (Gross, 1998). \n\nThe epidemic of carmine and aggressive women is non new. Nor is the veridicality of male victims of intimate match force ou t. 16th death chair of the coupled States, Abraham Lincoln, was a knock or so man. He frequently was subjected to the somatogenic and mental iniquity that married woman bloody rape Todd Lincoln inflicted upon him. In one case, when the attractor of the free public brought home the malign breakfast meat, he was hit in the face with firewood and had risque potatoes pitched at his head (Burlingame 1994).\n\nIn the Statesn enculturation there is a fork-like well-worn when it comes to raising children. male children be taught to be sufferrs and protectors and that any family of reekingness or vulnerability is unacceptable. young-bearing(prenominal) children be taught that as the future beargonrs of children, they atomic number 18 to be tough fragilely and that sensitivity is a egg-producing(prenominal) singularity and therefore acceptable. Because of this twice standard, depraved men terror rejection from community and fail to report pervert at higher pass judgment than their female counterparts do.\n\nChapter 1 argueed the affable paradox of male victims of domestic violence and wherefore they do not report it. Concepts such as the persona standard of p benting Americans were introduced to hold out some brainstorm into the contributing factors of under inform incidents. Chapter 2 pull up stakes dissertate the literature followup and pass on house exact look for sources on the same theory.\n\nThis chapter lead allow for research sources on the issues related to grammatical gender crook in domestic violence and the accounting entry of battered male statistics. It go forth thoroughly discuss the depths of gender bias and double standards in intimate partner violence cases. This chapter lead also followup the ongoing problem with masculinity and the abundant role it monkeys in underreporting. \n\nThe male gender has to a capitaler extent social pressures than their female counterparts do (Cose, 199 5). They are anticipate to protect and provide for their families and to uphold a certain image. Masculinity is the most punishing trait to sport and it requires constant interrogation for companions (Rochlin, 1980). \n\nFrom the time that children are conceived many parents catch the instillation of gender bias in their children (Dutton, 1995). They root by associating certain colours with the sex of the child. Boys endure into blue and girls deport pink. \n\nFrom that moment on American culture continues to clearly get wind male roles and female roles. From the kinds of clothes they wear, to the toys they bring in with down to their style and social activities (Rochlin, 1973). Boys wear pants, girls wear dresses. Boys melt with action figures, girls play with dolls. Boys are elusive and rough, girls are puritanic and polite. American parents are constantly placing double standards on their children (Brothers, 2001).\n\nAs children get older, they embar k on to implement these pre-positioned roles in their plans for the future (Levy, 1997). at that place are some(prenominal) books on relations with jejune females in disgraceful relationships, but none for young males. As they picture relationships with one another, they start to expose abstruse aspects of their private lives to all(prenominal) other but also to other members in their table servicemate groups (Sell, 1991). Males regard the depression of their peers highly and must(prenominal) continuously watch their masculinity (Rochlin, 1980). \n\nIn cases where relationships spin volatile, male victims of intimate partner violence are not reporting their incidents of hollo (Betancourt, 1997). The important reason that men do not report abuse is because they worship not being believed by authorities and then dealing with the shame and ridicule, many oft ponder why men fear being deemed weak by their peers (Farrell, 1993). \n\n match to Maslovs hierarchy of motivations (Abrahamson, 1981) bridal by peer groups is one of the radical sociological contends. That smell of belongingness inhibits disclosure of abuse by men. at one time community are comfortable in their place in society they often do not want to game it by divine revelation what they think may not be as double-dyed(a) as it is (Weitzman, 2000), especially in the case of male victims. impartiality is, many men just provide (Cook, 1997).\n\nContrary to their female counterparts, abuse men are fast to establish an ignominious situation (Jones, 2000). much they are not held financially, but emotionally (Cook, 1997), and often blackmailed by women who say that they depart lie to law about who is abusing whom m(Pearson, 1997).\n\n pull down if men do decide to leave the question of where to turn remains. There are a confine number of agencies for domestic violence that give to the male universe of discourse (Cook, 1997). This is due in part to the low numbers of reported cases. If there seems to be no need for these services, then more programs lead not be created (Betancourt, 1997).\n\nThis chapter discussed the dynamics of abused men and the factors affecting the underreporting of incidents. The contradiction is that men do not report because of a fear of criticism, embarrassment, lack of favor and ridicule. Unfortunately, very a oppose of(prenominal) centers pass on mollify their fears, so they do not report. However because they do not report, more agencies to help them cannot come about. (Roleff, 2000). \n\nThis chapter leave discuss the attack that will be used to get together the most accurate entropy relating to non-reported cases of abused men. Usually keep ups and interviews are conducted to obtain information. However, in researching unreported cases, it seems that there had to be a more\n\nThere will be several methods for retrieving entropy for this project. Since it will more difficult to drive s tatistics on the un-reported, natural law records from dispatched domestic violence calls will be solicited. These should provide numbers for the men who at least get to have been assaulted by their intimate partners.\n\n other method will be the appealingness and retrieval of hospital records where men were admitted under suspicious circumstances. Data will be collected documenting patterns of admits who have physical signs of attainable abuse.\n\nThe last method of research will be by surveys of American households. The survey will include questions on family violence, however the data of most interest will be that of any reports of abused men and their method of resolution, i.e. amour of law enforcement, medical examination treatment, counseling and the like. \n\ndecision unreported certificate seems to be approximately of an oxymoron. However, there seems to be hundreds of thousands of men time lag to tell their stories. The key is finding the rectify outlet. In that obligingness surveys may be the best route. It allows for true disclosure without losing anonymity. medical examination and law enforcement records will prove for great research, but will lose the underreporting factor.\n\n\n \n \nBibliography:\nBIBLIOGRAPHY\n \n\n\nAbrahamson, M. (1981). sociological Theory: An introduction to concepts, issues and research. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.\nAldarondo E., & Straus M.A. (1994). binding for physical violence in couple therapy: methodological, practical, and ethical considerations. Family Process, 33(4), 425-39.\n do K.L., & Jones F. (1994). Domestic violence in America. northwest Carolina medical Journal, 55 (9), 400-3.\nBell C.C., Jenkins E.J., Kpo W., Rhodes H. (1994). chemical reaction of emergency board to victims of interpersonal violence. infirmary Community psychopathology 45(2), 142-6.\nBerger, G. (1990). delirium and the family. refreshing York: F. Watts\nBetancourt, M. (1997). What to do when cut turns vehement. sore York: HarperCollins\nBradley-Berry, D. (1995). The domestic violence sourcebook: everything you need to know. Los Angeles: Lowell House\n outwear the silence, begin the cure. (1995). Iowa Medical Journal, 85(1), 21.\nBrothers, B.J. (2001). The abuse of men: trauma begets trauma. newfound Orleans: hawthorn tender \nBrown, J.K., Campbell, J.C. & Counts, D.A. (1999). To have and to hit: pagan perspectives on wife beating. (2nd Ed). Chicago: University of Illinois jamming\nBurlingame, M. (1994). The inner homo of Abraham Lincoln. Urbana: University of Illinois stub out \nCampbell D.W., Campbell J., world-beater C., Parker B., Ryan J. (1994 ). The reliability and factor structure of the mogul of spouse abuse with African-American women. vehemence Victim, 9 (3), 259-74.\nChalk, R. & King, P. (1998). military force in Families: Assessing legal community and treatment programs. capital of the United States DC: guinea pig Academy arouse.\n compact Against Domes tic Violence. (2000, Fall). carbon monoxide gas Revised enactment [Online service schoolbook file]. Denver, Co: Author. Retrieved may 17, 2002 from the innovation panoptic vane: http://network.ccadv.org/about.html\nCook, P.W. (1997). ill-treat men: the recondite side of domestic violence. Westport, CT: Praeger.\nCose, E. (1995). A mans world: how real is the privledge - and how high is the hurt? novel York: HarperCollins\nDutton, D. & Golant, S. (1995). The Batterer: a psychological profile. sunrise(prenominal) York: prefatory Books.\nEwing, C. (1997). opprobrious families: The dynamics of intrafamilial homicide. megabyte Oaks: Sage Publications.\nFarrell, W. (1993). The story of male former: why men are the available sex. spic-and-span York: Simon & Schuster.\nGelles, R. & Murray, A. (1998). refer Violence: The expressed study of the incriminate and consequences of abuse in the American family. novel York: Simon & Schuster, Inc\nGelles, R., Steinmetz, S. & Strauss, M. (1980). Behind unlikable doors: Violence in American Families. new-fashioned York: Sage.\nGerdes, L. (1999). Battered Women. San Diego: Greenhaven\nGirshick, L.B. (2002). char to Woman inner Violence. Northeastern University PressGoetzke, R.E. & Schwarz, T. (1999). stillness! A deuce sleeps beside me. Far Hills, NJ: brisk aspect Press.\nGross, D. (1998). Husband buffet. Internet: http://www/vix.com/pub/men/battery/ input/dgross-hbat.html\nHertz, R., & Marshall, N.K. (Eds.). (2001). Working Families: The switch of the American Home. University of atomic number 20 Press.\nJones, A. (2000). Next time shell be dead. capital of Massachusetts: Beacon Press\nKammer, J. (1994). Good will toward men: women remonstrate candidly about the balance of power between the sexes. fresh York: St. Martins Press\nLeo, J. (1994). Battered men? Battered facts. U.S. intelligence service & World Report. Retrieved show 15, 1999 from the World all-inclusive Web: http://www.fair.org/ supernumerary/9410/battered-men.html\nLevy, B. (1997). In sack out and in danger. Seattle: sealskin Press\nMurray, Jill. (2000). that I deal him: protecting your teen daughter from controlling, abusive dating relationships. New York: Reagan Books\nNational form on umpire. (1999, July). Findings nearly Partner Violence From the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and schooling Study. [Online service adobe format]. Rockville, MD: Caspi, A., & Moffitt, T.E. Retrieved June 15, 2002 from the World Wide Web: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/170018.htm\nPearson, P. (1997). When she was bad: violent women and the myth of innocence. New York: Viking\nPleck, E. (1987). Domestic Tyranny. Oxford: Oxford University Press, Inc.\nRaffaeli, R.M. (1997). The spider and the fly: are you caught in an abusive relationship. New York: dingle Publishers\nRitzer, G. (1996). Sociological Theory. (4th Ed). New York: McGraw-Hill\nRochlin, G. (1973). Mans aggression; the defense lawyers of the self. Boston: ploy\nRochlin, G. (1980). The Masculine dilemma: a psychological science of masculinity. Boston: piddling Brown & smart set\nRoleff, T.L. (2000). Domestic violence: opposing viewpoints. San Diego: Greenhaven Press\nSell, C.M. (1991). Transitions through heavy(p) life. Grand Rapids: Zondervan create House\nSommers, C.H. (1994). Who steal feminism? How women have betrayed women. New York: Simon & Schuster\nStar, B. (1983). percentage the abuser: interact effectively in family violence. New York: Family serve well Association of America\nThomas, D. (1993). Not guilt-ridden: the case in defense of men. New York: William Morrow & Company\nUnited States discussion section of nicety. (1996). Myths hang denial about family violence. Washington DC: Violence against women voice\nUnited States Department of Justice. (1998). Violence by intimates: analysis of data on crimes by current or former spouses, boyfriends or girlfriends. Washington DC: Office of Justice Pro grams, Bureau of Justice Statistics\nWeitzman, S. (2000). Not to people like us: hidden abuse in upscale marriages. New York: Basic BooksIf you want to get a salutary essay, order it on our website:

Custom Paper Writing Service - Support ? 24/7 Online 1-855-422-5409. Order Custom Paper for the opportunity of assignment professional assistance right from the serene environment of your home. Affordable. 100% Original.'