Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T22:12:06.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Onset and Severity of Spousal Violence Among Chinese Migrant Families: A Zero-Inflated Poisson Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2020

Xuan Chen*
Affiliation:
Department of Social Work, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China
Yiwei Xia
Affiliation:
School of Law, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu, People’s Republic of China
*
*Corresponding Author: Dr Xuan Chen, Department of Social Work, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou, People’s Republic of China. Phone: +86 13128865031. E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

Analyzing 1268 stratified random samples from one of the biggest cities in China’s Pearl River Delta with the zero-inflated Poisson model, this study identifies the factors associated with the onset and severity of spousal violence by males and females separately under the social exchange perspective. The results indicate that spousal violence follows gender symmetry in migrant families, and violence against men is mainly reflected in psychological violence. The new pattern of “cradle snatching” makes men fully protected in family relationships. However, women’s education level and economic independence do not represent a protective factor against violence from husbands. Patriarchal cognition is deeply rooted in migrant families, even though the family pattern has been changed and women’s status has improved in China. Young couples should contribute to the family according to their own abilities, and should not make either one feel wronged.

Abstracto

Abstracto

Analizando 1268 muestras aleatorias estratificadas de una de las ciudades más grandes del Delta del Río Perla de China con el Modelo de Poisson inflado a cero, este estudio identifica los factores asociados con el inicio y la gravedad de la violencia conyugal por parte de hombres y mujeres por separado bajo la perspectiva del intercambio social. Los resultados indican que la violencia conyugal sigue la simetría de género en las familias migrantes. La violencia contra los hombres se refleja principalmente en la violencia psicológica. El nuevo patrón de “secuestrador de cunas” hace que los hombres estén totalmente protegidos en las relaciones familiares. Sin embargo el nivel educativo y la independencia económica de las mujeres no representan un factor protector contra la violencia del marido. La cognición patriarcal está profundamente arraigada en las familias migrantes, a pesar de que el patrón familiar ha cambiado y el estatus de las mujeres ha mejorado en China. Las parejas jóvenes deberían contribuir a la familia de acuerdo con sus propias habilidades, y estar alertas que ninguno se sienta perjudicado.

Abstrait

Abstrait

En analysant 1268 échantillons aléatoires stratifiés provenant de l’une des plus grandes villes du delta de la rivière des Perles en Chine avec un modèle de Poisson à gonflement nul, cette étude identifie les facteurs associés à l’apparition et à la gravité de la violence conjugale par les hommes et les femmes séparément dans une perspective d’échange social. Les résultats indiquent que la violence conjugale suit la symétrie de genre dans les familles de migrants, et la violence contre les hommes se reflète principalement dans la violence psychologique. Le nouveau modèle de «berceau snatcher» permet aux hommes d’être pleinement protégés dans les relations familiales. Cependant, le niveau d’instruction et l’indépendance économique des femmes ne représentent pas un facteur de protection contre la violence de la part du mari. La cognition patriarcale est profondément enracinée dans les familles de migrants, même si le modèle familial a changé et que le statut des femmes s’est amélioré en Chine. Les jeunes couples devraient contribuer à la famille selon leurs propres capacités et ne devraient pas faire en sorte que l’un ou l’autre se sente lésé.

摘要

摘要

本研究基于对中国珠三角某一大城市进行分层随机抽样的1268份问卷调査,以社会交换理论为视角,运用零堆积泊松 (ZIP) 模型,就男性与女性配偶暴力的发生概率及严重程度进行研究。结果显示,外来务工人员家庭中的配偶暴力呈性别对称模式,男性比女性更少地主动报告家暴受害的经历;"姐弟恋"打破了传统婚恋模式,使男性在家庭关系中得到了充分的保护。但女性受教育程度的提升与经济独立并未成为其免遭暴力的保护性因素,尽管中国的婚姻家庭模式发生了变化,女性社会经济地位得到了提高,但父权文化在外来务工人员家庭仍然根深蒂固。年轻夫妻应依据自己能力贡献于家庭,而不应该让任何一方长时期感受到不公与委屈。

ملخّص

ملخّص

من خلال تحليل 1268 عينة عشوائية طبقيّة من واحدة من أكبر المدن في دلتا نهر اللؤلؤة Pearl River Delta في الصين، باستخدام نموذج بواسون صفريّ التّضخم Zero-inflated Poisson Model ، تُحَدِّد هذه الدراسة العوامل المرتبطة بظهور العنف الزوجي وشدّته، من جانب الذكور والإناث على حدة، وذلك في إطار نظريّة التبادل الاجتماعي. تشير النتائج إلى أن العنف الزوجيّ هو نتيجة التناظر الجنساني في الأسر المهاجرة، وأن العنف ضد الرجل ينعكس بشكل رئيسي في العنف النفسي. إنّ النّمط الجديد cradle catcher، وهو ما يُعرَفُ عادة بزواج الرّجل من، أو حتّى إقامة علاقة جنسيّة مع، إمرأة تصغره سنًّا بكثير ، يضمن حماية تّامة للرّجل في العلاقات الأسريّة. في حين أنّ المستوى الّتعليميّ للمرأة واستقلاليتها الاقتصاديّة لا يمثلان عاملا وقائيًّا لها ضد العنف من الزوج. وتبقى قيم المجتمع البطريركي متجذرًا في الأسر المهاجرة، حتّى وإن تغيّر النّمط الأسريّ وتحسّن وضع المرأة في الصّين. كما ينبغي على الأزواج الشباب المساهمة في دعم الأسرة وفقًا لقدراتهم الماديّة، دون إحساس أيّ منهم بالغبن.

Type
Article
Copyright
© 2020 International Society of Criminology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cai, X. 2005. “The Rural and Urban Differences Among Domestic Violence in Contemporary China [in Chinese].” Journal of Capital Normal University (Social Science) 3:102–5.Google Scholar
Chan, K. L. 2006. “The Chinese Concept of Face and Violence Against Women.” International Social Work 49(1):6573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, X. and Xia, Y.. 2015. “Risk Factors for Spousal Violence Based on Gender Difference: Findings from 748 Questionnaires of Hunan Province [in Chinese].” Journal of Hunan Agricultural University (Social Science) 16(2):40–7.Google Scholar
Cheng, J. and Hsu, W.. 1999. “A Study of How Marital Women Respond to Violence [in Chinese]Journal of Criminology 4:225–72.Google Scholar
Courtenay, W. H. 2000. “Constructions of Masculinity and Their Influence on Men’s Well-Being: A Theory of Gender and Health.” Social Science & Medicine 50(10):1385–401.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fiebert, M. S. 2014. “References Examining Assaults by Women on their Spouses or Male Partners: An Updated Annotated Bibliography.” Sexuality & Culture 18(2):405–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giles-Sims, J. 1985. “A Longitudinal Study of Battered Children of Battered Wives.” Family Relations 34(2):205–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goode, W. J. 1971. “Force and Violence in the Family.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 33(4):624–36.Google Scholar
Homans, G. C. 1961. Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Kimmel, M. S. 2002. “‘Gender Symmetry’ in Domestic Violence: A Substantive and Methodological Study Review.” Violence Against Women 8(11):1332–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambert, D. 1992. “Zero-Inflated Poisson Regression, with an Application to Defects in Manufacturing.” Technometrics 34(1):114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, C. and Jin, X.. 2012. “The Impact of Relative Conjugal Resources and Emotional Relationships on Marital Violence in Rural Urban Migrants’ Families: from a Gender Perspective [in Chinese].” Chinese Journal of Sociology 32(1):153–73.Google Scholar
Ma, C. 2013. “Gender, Power, Resources and Spousal Violence – A Comparison of Factors that Influence Husband Abuse and Wife Abuse [in Chinese].” Academic Research 9:3144.Google Scholar
Migliaccio, T. A. 2002. “Abused Husbands: A Narrative Analysis.” Journal of Family Issues 23(1):2652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller-Perrin, C. L. and Perrin, R. D.. 2012. Child Maltreatment: An Introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
O’Brien, J. E. 1971. “Violence in Divorce Prone Families.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 33:692–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Straus, M. and Douglas, E.. 2004. “A Short Form of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales, and Typologies For Severity and Mutuality.” Violence and Victims 19(5):507–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Straus, M. A. 1979. “Measuring Intrafamily Conflict and Aggression: The Conflicts Tactic Scale (CTS).” Journal of Marriage and Family 41(1):7588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Straus, M. A. and 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 48:465–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Straus, M. A., Hamby, S. L., Boney-McCoy, S., and Sugarman, D. B.. 1996. “The Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): Development and Preliminary Psychometric Data.” Journal of Family Issues 17(3):283316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsui, V., Cheung, M., and Leung, P.. 2010. “Help-seeking Among Male Victims of Partner Abuse: Men’s Hard Times.” Journal of Community Psychology 38(6):769–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xiao, J. and Feng, X.. 2014. “Chinese Marital Violence Status and Influence Factors – Based on the Family System [in Chinese].” Social Science 11:90–9.Google Scholar
Zeng, Y. and Zhang, H.. 2006. “The Violation of Women’s Human Rights by Domestic Violence [in Chinese].” Journal of South China University of Technology (Social Science) 8(5):20–4.Google Scholar
Zhao, Y., He, G., and Zhu, Y.. 2011. “Prevention and Alleviation: An Exploration of the Role of Social Capital in Marital Violence [in Chinese].” Chinese Journal of Sociology 31(1):5373.Google Scholar
Zhou, L. and Chen, X.. 2015. “Conditions and Factors for Spousal Violence Against Migrant Women: Findings from an Empirical Study of Xiushui County in Jiangxi Province [in Chinese].” Chinese Journal of Population Science 29(2):104–14.Google Scholar