OVER the past few weeks, I’ve seen many a headline which speak of women and children being badly hurt or even killed as a result of domestic disputes, or rather, domestic violence. 

This issue was again brought to the limelight with the recent situation whereby a popular American footballer, Ray Rice, rendered his wife unconscious by hitting her on the head and then dragging her out of the elevator like a piece of rag.
This has since prompted me to relook at what is perceived as domestic violence.
Now, I’m well aware that this is something that you can’t quite sum up, and that the term “domestic violence” is inadequate to cover the scope and depth of this varied and complex matter which seems to have taken over our society like a cancer.
It is my intention over the next few weeks to add something of substance to the debate; something I believe is impossible in the limited space for a weekly column.
To quote Wikipedia: “Domestic violence, also known as domestic abuse, spousal abuse, family violence, and intimate partner violence (IPV), can be broadly defined as a pattern of abusive behaviours by one or both partners in an intimate relationship such as marriage, dating, family, friends or cohabitation.
“Domestic violence has many forms including physical aggression (hitting, kicking, biting, shoving, restraining, slapping, throwing objects), or threats thereof; sexual abuse; emotional abuse; controlling or domineering; intimidation; stalking; passive/covert abuse (e.g., neglect); and economic deprivation.  […]  Awareness, perception, definition and documentation of domestic violence differs widely from country to country, and from era to era. … According to the Centers for Disease Control, domestic violence is a serious, preventable public health problem affecting more than 32 million Americans, or over 10% of the U.S. population.”
The US Office on Violence Against Women (OVW) defines domestic violence as a “pattern of abusive behaviour in any relationship that is used by one partner to gain or maintain power and control over another intimate partner.”
The definition adds that domestic violence “can happen to anyone regardless of race, age, sexual orientation, religion, or gender,” and can take many forms, including physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional, economic, and psychological abuse.”
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service in the United Kingdom, in its “Domestic Violence Policy”, uses domestic violence to refer to a range of violent and abusive behaviours, defining it as:
Patterns of behaviour characterised by the misuse of power and control by one person over another who are or have been in an intimate relationship. It can occur in mixed-gender relationships and same gender relationships and has profound consequences for the lives of children, individuals, families and communities. It may be physical, sexual, emotional and/or psychological. The latter may include intimidation, harassment, damage to property, threats and financial abuse. What is also interesting is that the same publication states only a third of the cases of domestic violence are actually reported in the US and the UK.
Locally, deaths attributable to domestic violence seem to be more frequent and show no indication of slowing down – I’m not certain of the actual number of women who have been killed as a result of domestic violence so far this year, but being previewed to articles with headlines such as “Another woman killed by husband”, you can’t help but feel a sense of outrage.
When the former Minister of Human Services, Priya Manickchand launched the ‘Stamp it Out, Take Control’ campaign against domestic violence over five years ago, it was rightfully applauded as a significant initiative in reforming the official response to the problem, including tightening enforcement of the 1996 Domestic Violence Act.
Now, I don’t go out and about much, so I don’t know the general tone of what has gone on in terms of public reaction to the enforcement of the legislation, but judging from little snippets of conversation I’ve heard at various places, there seems to be a certain amount of disbelief among men at how absurd and unfair the law seems.
For example, I was at the barbershop about two weeks ago when one of the barbers started talking about some problem he was having with some young woman; somebody who, from all indications, wasn’t the person he had a home relationship with. His customer, an older man, helpfully suggested that when a woman got disrespectful, just two slaps, and she would calm right down. To which the young barber replied with words to the effect: “You can’t do that now, bannas; you just put a lil hand pun them girls these days and the Minister say to jail you.”
More remarkable than that statement was all the headshaking and grumbling in agreement it engendered.  What it indicated to me was that these men had formed a consensus that the law was somehow doing them an injustice by making abuse of the women in their lives punishable by the term spent in jail. Now, I know that those 10 or so men that were in the barbershop that night may not be representative of the society as whole, but I can’t help but project that this mindset isn’t restricted to that random group, and that it may actually be widespread across the society.
If this supposition were true, if it is that the enforcement of the law on what is such a clear-cut matter seems to be just an irritating and overzealous inconvenience to men, it is clear that we are still a very long way from stamping it out, the attitude that says that men are allowed to “put two slap in” their women in order to keep them in order. Subsequently, not only do the killings continue but the reports of domestic assault as well, almost daily in the newspapers.
And even more insidious and widespread than that are the unreported cases of physical violence as well as the abuse being meted out, primarily to women and children that fall under the various categories mentioned in the Wikipedia article quoted at the beginning of this column.
Over the course of this series, what I’ll be doing is examining ways in which we as a society can recapture and convert into sustainable initiatives the very energy that was roused by the original Stamp it Out campaign, ways in which we build upon the progress made with regard to enforcement, while getting to the core root of the issue, which really is, the engraining of a certain attitude with regard to abuse that has become part of our collective psychological makeup.

Other than the numerous campaigns, I believe that this issue should be addressed at the secondary school and tertiary institutions with both males and females taking part.
It is my form conviction that young women should also be thought of the signals that indicate a person with a violent disposition in order to remove themselves from that relationship.

I hope to expand a bit more on issues relating to domestic violence in future article.