Applying Socioecological Framework to Acid Attack Violence: An Exploration of Inhabitant Factors

Abstract

This study focused on the phenomenon of acid attack violence by using the socioecological framework. It explored the personal, relational, institutional, and cultural factors that contribute toward the act of acid violence. By using the qualitative research design, 15 in-depth interviews were conducted from acid victims. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the data. The main themes under the framework of social ecology focused on certain inhabitant aspects such as prevailing poverty, forced marriages, conflicting relationships, lack of social support, the falsified religious interpretation of violence, lack of medical assistance, and poor response of law enforcement agencies. This lack of social support is extended at an institutional level as well as where rehabilitative help and response were absent. This study concluded the complexity and interdependence of all levels factors contribute to the act of acid violence. Moreover, it emphasized the need to develop a biopsychosocial approach to address the issue.

Keywords

acid throwing socioecological theory thematic analysis personal and relational factors community and societal factors

Introduction

“Acid violence” or “acid throwing” is one of the most heinous violence around the globe that women experience in their lives. Acid attack phenomenon is mostly observed in developing countries like Nepal, Cambodia, and Uganda, but countries in which high level of acid violence is observed include Bangladesh, India, and Pakistan (Gulrez, 2016). Violence against women in Pakistani society is deeply rooted in the legal, cultural, and social structure of the society (Ali & Gavino, 2008). Gender-based violence has been observed as a very common practice in Pakistani household and found in every next house of the society. Husbands habitually control their wives with violence to uphold their manhood (Khan & Hussain, 2008).

“Acid throwing” or “acid attack” is one of the worst forms of gender-based violence experienced by mostly women. It is a deliberate effort to “disfigure, maim, torture, or kill” the person in which the use of hydrochloric, sulfuric, or nitric acid is made as a weapon (Patel, 2014, p. 1). Acid throwing resulted in severe pain, disfiguring the face or the body and sometimes loss of hearing. It is observed that usually acid is thrown on the face to permanently disfigure the physical appearance of the victim (Bandyopadhyay & Khan, 2003).

According to Acid Survivor Foundation (2010) Pakistan, acid violence is not uncommon in Pakistan, but the government had not provided valid statistics on acid violence. However, many other organizations found some data on these incidences. This phenomenon is not fully explored in Pakistan, only a few number of researches are found. Mostly, researches on acid violence are done in India, Bangladesh, and Cambodia. A study conducted by Zia (2002) from Pakistan explored that reliable data were difficult to trace not only because of the nonavailability of data from the unsafe and dangerous areas of Pakistan but also due to the nonregistration and misreporting of the data. However, Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) worked on the mapping of data based on the monitoring of the media and found 30 cases in the year 2010, 75 in 2011, 966 cases in 2012, 67 in 2013, 84 in 2014, and 49 cases in 2015 in the first 8 months. According to the Acid Survivor Foundation database, during 2007–2015, 675 women were victims of acid throwing. The Acid Survivor Foundation (2015) also found that in Punjab province highest incidents of acid throwing occurred specifically in the cities of Southern Punjab. Its number (113) was the highest.

Section 335 of Pakistan’s Criminal Law based on Pakistan Penal Code 1860 is about offenses relating to human body appearance which include hurt and death too, it also stated the penalties based on Islamic laws such as Qisas, Diyat, and Arsh that are payable to the heirs of victims. It was due to high incidents of acid throwing in Punjab province, additional measures were added by the government in 2004. As per this Act, medical officers were allowed to treat acid victims before the police examination. It also gives priority to treat the victim and restrict police interference during required medical treatment (Acid Survivor Foundation, 2015). Most recently, the Senate of Pakistan had also passed Acid and Burn Crime Act, 2018. The bill was passed by the national assembly in 2017. It offered free medical treatment, rehabilitation of victims, as well as trials of accused in short time (Senate of Pakistan, 2018). Despite the fact that these Acts have been passed by legislative bodies, still the number of attacks has not stopped and women are being victimized specifically.

Why acid is thrown? What are the factors behind this human right violation? These are two important concerns that this study wanted to highlight through literature. Nasreen (2012) in her study stated that a broken love affair, refusal for a marriage proposal, sex advances, and disloyalty were the main reasons for acid throwing. Religious fundamentalism was another factor identified by Babur (2007) in his study. As per findings of his study, acid was also thrown by religious fundamentalists on women who apparently looked modern and follow anti-Islamic values. Owing to their fundamentalist views, they considered women wearing jeans or other modern dresses anti-Islamic and showed their anger and punished them in this way. However, findings of Khoshnami et al.’s (2017) study which was conducted in Iran identified factors other than cultural context and narrated lack of problem-solving skills in interpersonal conflicts and the use of drug as the main factors behind acid throwing. Welsh (2009) discovered certain motivational factors and causes of acid violence in his study conducted in India, Bangladesh, and Cambodia. Research findings exposed a significant relation between acid throwing and gender-based violence. The findings also traced that culture of violence, poverty, and hostility were key determinants of domestic violence in Cambodia. Anwary (2003) in her study identified masculinity and superiority of the men as the indicators of acid throwing. Men used this tool to “keep women in their place.” It was used as “a weapon to silence and control women by destroying what was constructed as the primary constituent of her identity.” In India, dowry death was the main factor related to acid attacks; the study found that it was the major factor behind violence on women from husbands and in-laws (Panchanadeswaran & Koverola, 2005). Page (2005) in “No Justice for Pakistan Acid Victims,” stated that acid harassment was more common in rural areas of Pakistan as the consequences of rejected marriage proposals, infertility, doubt of illegal relations, family disputes, and the other factors were still not fully explored. Acid throwing in the name of honor was another factor identified by few researches, and this act was not prevailing just in South Asia but also in other Asian societies (Ghouri & Abrar, 2010; Sev’er & Yurdakul, 2001).

Effects of acid attack are not just limited to physical disability or disfiguring the body, it had long and devastating effect on psychological state of victims that resulted in depression, anxiety, isolation, loss of self-confidence, and social exclusion, self-imposed or enforced by society (Guerrero, 2013; Mannan et al., 2006). A quantitative research done on acid violence by Malik and Khan (2013) investigated the emotional experiences of acid survivors. They found that acid victims were confined to their homes due to their burnt, alien resembling faces, and they perceived that they were worthless part of society due to shame and stigma, but the in-depth detailed practical problem faced by survivors was still not fully explored.

Applying Socioecological System Theory as a Framework to Measure the Phenomenon of Acid Attack Violence

Previous researches on acid throwing are unable to grasp all levels of inquiry and remained restricted to individual- or relational-level factors and only touched a single level of inquiry. This research, by applying socioecological framework through qualitative investigation of acid victims, explains the way in which the macro-level systems inspire the attitudes and behavior at meso, exo, and micro levels. Hence, it guided the researcher in the study to explore multilevel factors. The socioecological system theory was given by Bronfenbrenner in 1994 on ecology of human development. The socioecological system theory validates that symbiotic relation of human development could be seen at individual, relational, and collective levels. In this regard, various methodologies were used to understand the complexity of multiple systems through interdependent relations and bilateral actions in socioecological framework systems (Denzin & Lincoln, 2003; Smith & Osborn, 2007). Also, in this context, it is important to see how individuals ascribe meanings in social interaction through culture and languages (Crotty, 1998; Esterberg, 2002; Flick, 2006). As individuals are stakeholders while addressing and conceptualizing any social issue, it is critical to get through their varied experiences and framing the research. Contextualization of lived experience and looking deep down into the stakeholders are critical elements of qualitative inquiry. At personal level, shared symbols, collective ideas, and beliefs help an individual to construct meanings. At the same time, social ecology is influenced by individuals while controlling the resource cycle and assembling norms and beliefs across multiple cultural systems. Bronfenbrenner (1994) model of socioecological system outlined the nested individuals’ attitudes and behavior within social ecology.

This system illustrates the ways how individual participants construct knowledge as well as how research gets influenced by these systems. Researcher’s knowledge itself explains the formal and informal structures involved in developing his norms and values (Smith & Osborn, 2007). During an interview when a researcher asks “how do you?” the victim (he or she) actually starts manifesting the mental categories and depictions evolving from relationship interactions within social systems. This knowledge again converts into filter in constructing codes and themes. At the same time, factors of exchange at personal and relational level play their role in the collective system at macro level. Again, the macro system based on collective symbols, norms, and ideas reflect in micro system in the process of exchange. Therefore, at institutional level, individuals living in these systems perform in relation to the macro-level norms and cultural values (Bronfenbrenner, 2000). Thus, framing a social issue with socioecological system simplifies the complexity and uncovered the sociocultural aspects and asymmetrical power of exo systems. This asymmetrical power looks for the areas where action needs to be taken in social system. This model appraised that not a single factor is responsible for the violence; it is a complexity of interaction at individual, relational, and society level (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998; Heise, 1998). By applying this socioecological model, this study aimed at exploring the phenomenon of acid attack violence. The objectives defined for the study were to

Explore personal and relational factors behind the act of acid throwing;

Investigate how societal- and cultural-level factors contribute toward the incident of acid throwing and after the incident; and

Find out the inhibited discriminations at individual, institutional, and cultural levels toward female and its relevance with the act of acid throwing.

Method

This research was qualitative that adopted philosophical stance of interpretivism. Based on ontological stance of interpretivism and epistemological stance of social constructionists, this study recognizes the way sociocultural and community-based factors led to violent behavior. The social constructionism stance explains that “truth, or meaning, comes into existence in and out of our engagement with the realities in our world.” Moreover, it describes how constructionists explained the reality as Crotty stated, “all knowledge, and therefore all meaningful reality as such, was contingent upon human practices, being constructed in and out of interaction between human beings and their world, and transmitted with an essentially social context.” In this study, researchers tried to consider the reality of acid victims in context of socioecological model and how different level factors are contributing toward the issue. Data was collected through in-depth interviews and later the thematic content analysis was employed. The discussion guide was developed through some deductive codes which were based on previous literature. As acid throwing is a very sensitive issue, people usually avoided to talk about it. Due to the sociopsychological state of victim after the incident, a majority of them did not agree to share their experience so, it was very crucial for researchers to reach them and to get information from them. Therefore, researchers contacted the Smile Again Foundation, Lahore. Smile Again Foundation is being run by a beautician and social worker Mussarat Misbah who works for reconstructive surgeries and rehabilitation of acid victims. Few of the survivors were also working at the beauty salon and engaged in productive employment. In-depth interviews were conducted by using purposive sampling technique. By contacting them and explaining the purpose of study, the researchers requested them to allow them to interview the survivors. The inclusion criteria for the study were (a) the respondents had experienced acid attack during the last 5 years; (b) had good physical and psychological health; and (c) were willing to give interview for the study. A total of 15 respondents gave their consent to give interviews. Each interview took 2 to 3 hr; respondents included both married and unmarried acid victims.

Interviews were conducted in Urdu, by following an interview guide that included background, personal information, the experience of acid throwing, prevailing community norms, environmental factors, the role of media and legal institutes, social reactions of society, psychological state of respondents after the incident, perception of their circumstances, and recent life experiences. This guide further helped in working on the emergent themes in the analysis. With due permission, interviews were audio-recorded but keeping in mind the principle of anonymity and confidentiality, respondents’ names were not revealed and they were assigned the code, that is, Respondent A, Respondent B, and so on. Each interview was transcribed and translated from Urdu to English by using the Express Scribe software. Summary notes were prepared after each interview and cross-checked by the researchers individually to ensure that there was no missing information.

Data Analysis

To analyze the in-depth interviews in this study, thematic analysis was used. It provides an opportunity to identify the structure and complexity of the relationship of participant’s experiences. A unique feature of thematic analysis is that it organizes the text and codes in a sociocultural context (Braun & Clarke, 2006). At multiple levels, thematic analysis allows the researcher to deliberate the data through conceptual links and networks (Fereday & Muir-Cochrane, 2008). In this study, the thematic analysis helped to identify the factors at multiple levels that contribute to acid throwing. Two coders coded the data and the third researcher cross-checked with the main assumptions. To achieve an intercoding agreement, a set of standard rules was formulated for coding procedure. A coding list containing names and concise definitions of each code was prepared by using one third of the interviews. During weekly research team debate sessions, codes were integrated and refined to develop concepts, categories, and subcategories.

The positionality of the researcher is very important to explain in qualitative researches. Temple and Young (2004) explained that positionality could affect research outcomes and interpretations, because “one’s position within the social world influences the way in which you see it” (p. 164). The coauthors in this article as a research team give their reflections that described their positionality with reference to this study. The researchers’ reflections expressed that their positionality as a female gender impacted their communication while they were engaged with the participants. The scholarly concerns developed personal and professional apprehensions of researchers. It was due to researchers’ positionality that they became emotionally invested to the participants, however, having a sound background on social issues data allowed for authentic representations of the participants. The research team respected participants’ diverse experiences still at a few points they also found some similarities due to local cultural backgrounds.

Trustworthiness in this study was ensured through credibility and dependability. To increase credibility, analytical triangulation was used along with field notes. Sustained engagement in the subject matter also added to the credibility. To establish the credibility of research, formal member checking was adopted. During analysis, the process of having four consensuses was grasped through peer checks. Dependability was established by the study team by reaching similar findings and conclusion.

Ethical Considerations

Approval from the CEO of Smile Again Foundation was given to approach the respondents. Participants explained in detail the purpose of the study and informed written consent was taken from each participant that also included the permission of audio recording of each respondent without mentioning the name. All the participants were interviewed in a separate room so that they might feel free to share their experiences without the influence of any power dynamics from the organization. It was guaranteed to the participants that they are independent to take part in the interview if they feel any trouble to share their knowledge they might leave even without telling the researchers. All the participants were assured about the data security that it would not be utilized for any wrong purpose and the respondents’ privacy would be maintained.

Results

The findings of the study revealed various factors of acid throwing identified by respondents under the umbrella of the main theme of social ecology. This study explored personal-, relational, and community-level factors that led to the act of acid throwing. To facilitate analysis of data, study findings were discussed under the following themes: micro-level personal factors, meso-level relational factors, exo-level community, and situational factors and macro-level social factors.

Demographic Characteristics of the Respondents

In the study, a total of 15 respondents participated who were victims of acid throwing and after reconstructive surgeries and rehabilitation were engaged in some productive work. The age range of the respondents was 18 to 46 years. Out of 15 respondents, 11 were married and four were unmarried. The age at marriage of married respondents was 17 to 20 years. A majority was living in a joint family system. Almost all of the respondents were from poor socioeconomic backgrounds. Twelve out of 15 respondents were illiterate, two were having primary-level education, and one of the respondents was intermediate. Before the incident, only two were employed and rest were involved in domestic chores. After attacks and rehabilitation, 12 of the respondents were involved in the beautician profession.

The Micro Level: Personal Factors

At personal-level factors, the study found that illiteracy of girls and lower level of education was the main factors that restricted respondents’ exposure and kept them at low socioeconomic scale. Results showed that lack of education might be increasing the incident of assault, as the educational status showed majority of the victims had not been to school. Socioeconomic status of family in general and respondents in particular also made them more vulnerable as being dependents their voices were not heard and they were considered as subordinates. Another associated element found was marriages at an early age as a common practice. Both phenomena were interlinked as in most cases after marriage girls were not allowed to get further education and were forced to involve in household chores.

The findings of the study suggest that respondents were submissive and passive, having no say in the family matters. One of the important findings in the context of this submissiveness was that violent behavior and beating of the women was an acceptable and learned behavior that was being transmitted at the intergenerational level. As respondents saw their fathers beating their mothers and other women, the acceptance of violence from the male members of the family was a common thing that made them more vulnerable.

Girls and women due to passive behavior in which they were socialized did not raise their voices even after the incident of acid throwing. One of the respondents shared that every time her husband apologized for his behavior even after acid throwing, he himself took her to hospital for treatment so when he requested her not to tell anything to the police, she did the same and did not mention her husband’s name and the case was shut down. But her husband divorced her later after 1 month of the incident. She stated, “We women are emotional fools that is why we bear all our lives.”

Another major outcome from in-depth interviews shed light on the fact that due to low confidence, learned submissive behavior, and controlling attitudes of male members of the family either from fathers or husbands even after the incident of acid throwing, women faced coping skills deficit. This low confidence and trauma of disfigurement of the face and body further led to stress and inability to cope with the situation. One of the respondents reported about the psychological impact on her, she stated, “I just not only got scars on my face, but also my soul is injured.”

A respondent attempted suicide after that incident but was saved. She explained in detail that it was very shocking for her to see her burnt face. She left looking in the mirror. The majority (11 out of 15) tried to commit suicide after the incident. A majority stopped going to functions and stated that they did not have the courage to go into public especially right after the incident. As one of the respondents said, “People used to get scared of her face.” The above discussion suggested that women are socialized in submissiveness from early childhood and the same led to their dependence and vulnerability in later life.

As myths of beauty are mostly associated with face attractiveness, after acid throwing, low self-esteem was reported by respondents as their beauty had gone. One of the respondents told that it was difficult to live with this deformed face so she wanted to die and prayed for that as well. She further stated, “Having a beautiful face is an asset of any woman. Losing the face means losing a life to me.” Normally, in Pakistani society, beauty and perfection are valued and any woman with physical or facial frailty is considered as unattractive. In the case of acid attack survivors, they were deprived of their traditional worth and were considered as unfit for the society as well. The majority remained confined to their houses after acid attacks, and it was almost impossible to find a match or life partner for them. This badly affected their psychological health and well-being. These personal-level factors further related to relational-level factors that included family community and localities.

Meso Level: Relational Factors

The second major dimension within the framework of social ecology is relational factors such as the relationship with husband and family as well as the marital or household issues. The most important finding emerged from the thematic analysis was the conflicting and dissatisfactory relationship between the partners. One of the reasons was forced marriage. In Pakistan, most of the marriages are arranged by family and sometimes enforced on girls as well as on boys by family elders. Both partners do not have an influence on the decisions and choices of each other. In this regard, it is usually a family’s survival strategy to ask for dowry because economic liability rested with the girl being married to their sons. In this centuries-old tradition, the groom’s family pressurizes the bride’s family for valuable things or amounts as a gift to the groom or his family. In the present study, one of the victims whose parents were living in a slum of Lahore was married to a member of the same socioeconomic group. She reported that since her marriage demands from her in-laws and husband were a routine matter that was difficult to handle. She stated, “Dowry is the burden on poor parents and sometimes they die because of this burden.”

The study found that on not fulfilling the demand of in-laws, acid was thrown on her. The findings also suggest that violent behavior or conflicting relation with the wife was not only contingent to dowry or money. It was also associated with low satisfaction with the marital bond. Sometimes it was related to the upbringing and cultural dominance of men that they considered their wives and daughters as inferior and did not own them as family member. The dichotomy of the reality was that those who pressurized and pump them (mothers and sisters) for such acts were women themselves. One of the respondents in the present study informed about a typical mind-set of her father regarding discrimination he made between daughters and sons. The respondent said: “It was my mother who made efforts for her daughter; my father hated us because we were daughters.”

Another dimension that came through findings was the influence of peer group in using any substance and even beating the female members of the house or involving their names with other men of family and locality. In most of the cases, alcohol and other drugs were provided by friends even sometimes without any cost. But later on, this cost was paid by female members of the family by spending time with them. She narrated: “He was double-dealer; he did not allow me to go outside the home but forced me to spend time in his friends’ company; it was an irony of my situation.” Therefore, proving that the bad company of peers was another factor leading to acid victimization.

Lack of social support by families was another prominent finding of the study. Before marriage, this support was restricted due to the gender of girls as male members thought that they were a burden and must be married earlier so they could get rid of their responsibility. In most of the cases, even when girls reported any violence after marriage from husband, the family did not support them and asked them to compromise: “People usually say I, myself am responsible for my condition.”

Study also found that even in the case of emergency treatment after acid was thrown, family members did not bother to provide further treatment to the victim. One of the reasons could be extreme poverty and other could be social pressure. Four out of 10 respondents said that their family members did not support them and did not bother to treat them. In most cases, the closing of the case was the result of the involvement of relatives who had decision-making power in the family and the local people who also discouraged any police or legal involvement as it implicated further spending of money and time wastage. As one of the respondents stated, “Only the people with power can fight for their rights in this country,” hence, proving the fact that social pressure of relatives led to the decision of withdrawing legal cases.

These situational and relational factors, that is, dowry, forced marriage, a conflicting relationship of husbands and wife, peer pressure, and bad company, further led to find out the role of exo systems or community-level factors where these social relationships grew, such as schools, workplaces, and neighborhood.

Exo System: Institutional and Community Factors

Study findings explained the poor socioeconomic state of the respondents as one of the factors behind the incident of acid throwing. In the extreme form, anger and inability to face the outside socioeconomic pressure, women become victims. A majority of respondents were living in an extreme state of poverty. The respondent reported, “Having one meal a day would have a great achievement for me at home.” The results of in-depth interviews revealed that (12 out of 15) respondents were hardly making both ends meet. In few cases, they wished to become the earning hands of the family but due to the powerlessness and relying on decision making from the head of the family, the issues and quarrels started. Beating from husbands, fathers, and brothers was common practice. In few cases, suspiciousness from a partner was also found. One of the respondents stated, “My husband had relations with other women; he usually beats me while coming back home and also doubts my character.”

In another case, when the demand for money was not fulfilled by the family, the respondent started working as a housemaid to fulfill the demand of her husband. He was a security guard but addicted as well. It was his routine to beat her in anger. “Getting injuries from my husband was a routine matter for me.” She stated, “He was a hypocrite; he hated my job but at the same time snatched my salary.”

The lower socioeconomic status was not a single factor at the community level, the impunity of perpetrators was another dimension found in the results. In most cases, this immunity was provided by families while in other cases bribing the police facilitated the perpetrators. Respondents in this scenario stated,

My husband and in-laws got bail from court due to the absence of solid evidence.

Police of the country is not less than any evil.

Only people with heavy pockets can get justice in this country.

Social permissiveness of such cases by society and law enforcement agencies could be highlighted by media, but in all cases, respondents said that media did not come to show their situation. One of the respondents said, “I don’t know to whom media highlights and facilitates. In our situation, there were no media.” Thus, the fact was identified that most of the cases were even not reported and highlighted.

One of the important study findings was the provision of poor health facilities for acid victims. In all the cases, respondents reported insufficient emergency facilities including the absence of burn units even at District Head Quarter (DHQ)-level hospitals. The majority of the respondents moved to big cities like Lahore and Multan for treatment and even that treatment was not sufficient. One of the respondents said that the pathetic burning units were available in hospital and her condition remained miserable for 1 month: “I only got the pain killer injections from hospital.”

Another respondent told that she was burnt badly. She got terrible scars on her mouth, neck, arms, stomach, and digestive system was badly burnt. When she was admitted in hospital, the behavior of hospital staff was not good.

The study also found that the face deformity of respondents led to difficulties to spend a normal life. Stigmatization affects the self-image and self-confidence of the respondents. The respondent reported about the psychological impact on her: “I just not only got scars on my face, but also my soul is injured.”

An overwhelming majority said that instead of supporting them, the community labeled them as wicked or evil women. In the situation of trauma and insufficient social support, a majority (12 out of 15) also tried to commit suicide. And even when they survived with facial and body deformity, society did not let them engage in any productive employment. A few years after the incident, one of the respondents reported that society was not ready to accept her. She got refusal from many workplaces: “Nobody was ready to take me even as a housemaid.” Study findings advocated that without the support of the government, it was very difficult for them to survive and become economically independent.

These community-level issues further created relevance toward the societal-level cultural ideologies that were in-built at every level, in either institution or lawmaking or implementation. The last section of these study findings threw light on how these cultural ideologies had reinforced the discriminatory behaviors and rooted the basis for such an act of acid throwing.

Macro System: Societal Factors

Findings of the study throw light on the male dominance patterns, women’s acceptance of power, and superiority of men as well as violence through cultural practices, poor laws, and the implementation.

The majority of the respondents (11 out of 15) shared their experiences of how they were not allowed by their fathers and husbands to go outside the house without their permission or alone. In case the respondents go outside for some earning or necessary work, they were beaten by the men of the family. One of the respondents stated, “I was never allowed to go anywhere alone without being accompanied by a husband.”

Another respondent said, “Unwritten Rules of command by men cost women lives.”

The study found that this unwritten dominance was just not limited to permission to go outside but also it involves how they dress up and to whom they interact within and outside the family. In the name of honor, suspicion toward female members of the family was a common thing. Violation of expected dressing and prospective norms for women thus resulted in the use of abusive language and beating as well. It had been ingrained in the psyche of men that they had all the control over their women so they also had the right to punish them. Similarly, as the women grew up in the family structure supporting patriarchy, they accepted any type of violence or dared not to challenge their authority. One of the respondents of the study said, “I was used to my being beaten by my husband.”

Approval of violence was also allied with the role of belief system. One of the emergent themes of this study was that violence was not culturally accepted but it also had strong religious misinterpretation. Majority of the women who faced violence, ultimately acid throwing, shared that it was socialized in religious education from the religious teachers as well that husband had the right to hit as well as he was the head and such matters must not be shared with others. One of the respondents said, “before this incident I thought, ‘My husband has the right to love me and hit me as he is the head.’”

Another reported a different statement: “Slapping is a bliss and it comes from heaven.”

On probing the reason behind the statement, it was realized that she had built this belief on the basis of misrepresented religious teaching from the community-level religious leader and his wife. And this belief was strengthening when mothers were also teaching them that it was allowed to husbands in religion to beat women for controlling the household matters. So while they accepted beating and other torture, they could not realize how this dormant attitude toward this could ignite the situation and would further lead toward such extreme incidents of acid throwing.

The study found that the existing cultural practices endorsed the way men behave in society in the name of honor. As honor was associated with women, if some close female relative was alleged of violating any custom or norm of honor, a man was allowed to punish her. In this way, his own reputation was restored in society. One of the respondents who was unmarried and victimized by her paternal aunt shared, “He did not bother to provide us food but he threatened me to break my legs when I thought of going out.”

Another respondent when decided to go out for the earning, her husband scolded her hard and she shared that he said, “You go outside for your own profligacy.”

The dichotomous cultural practice of associating honor with girls or women but not fulfilling their necessities led to conflicting situations. This situation was more evident in lower socioeconomic status. The culture of revenge was another dimension linked to it. When women tried to challenge the masculinity of men in terms of getting economic empowerment, they got reactive. Those women were considered as nondocile and nonconformist thus created misogyny and were punished in many ways. Majority shared that they got strong reactions from husbands or male members of the family when they began to go outside for work.

The inequality was deeply rooted at the intuitional level in which primary and secondary institutions were also involved. The findings of the study suggested that any policy or legislation regarding gender-based violence or acid throwing was not acknowledged by the respondents. Although probing about the postincident state and seeking any legal aid, majority due to social pressure did not seek any type of care and those who wanted to seek any help were not aware of any legal help. One of the respondents who was literate and had passed her intermediate exams shared that when she was discharged from hospital, she intended to file a case against her culprits but she failed to do so due to insufficient economic resources and without any information of any legal aid center for their help (Figure 1).

Figure 1.

Graphical representation of the themes within the framework of social ecology of acid throwing.

Discussion

This study explored the phenomenon of acid throwing in the context of the socioecological model and tried to dig up the individual, relational, societal, and cultural aspects to create an understanding of the sociocultural factors of this premeditated act. The results revealed that there was not a single process solely responsible for the act. It was a complex combination of the practices that were responsible for the act. For example, the first objective of the study was to find out the personal- and relational-level factors that contributed toward the act of acid throwing. The findings of the study explained that at personal-level factors passivity and submissiveness of girls along with low self-esteem were the main reasons for being docile and nonreactive. But these reasons were not just limited to their own personality or behavior but were also self-constructed. In traditional societies, the girls are generally brought up in a way to remain silent, obedient, and compliant.

The very first institution that is involved in their upbringing is the family in which certain gender roles are taught. These gender roles are socially and culturally constructed at macro level through cultural ideologies and are transferred to all the segments of society. Socialization of typical gender roles with masculinity and femininity creates segregation between the two genders in terms of their behaviors and attitudes. In this typical gender role socialization, girls usually learned to remain passive and had low self-esteem, whereas boys are considered and brought up as brave, outgoing, and courageous. This is not just limited to a direct association of roles, girls also learn these behaviors through indirect socialization while looking at the behavior of their mothers and the way the male members specifically fathers deal with the female members of the family. These facts could be ascertained from the findings of the study conducted by Anwary (2003) in Bangladesh, she narrated that men use masculinity as a tool to control women and as a weapon to show their superiority over them, Thus, women kept themselves silent so that this weapon might not be used against them. Another study conducted by Leaper in 2013 on parents’ socialization of gender in children explained the ways through which certain gender roles were inculcated in the mind-set of boys and girls. These included the gender-stereotypical expectations from boys and girls, parents’ traditional gender role modeling, and the differential treatment of the parents toward sons and daughters. The study further concluded that though parents had egalitarian views on some issues in most of the domains toward their sons and daughters, they kept traditional expectations and decisions. These also included the decision of age at marriage and the selection of life partners (Rajwani & Pachani, 2015). As our study also reported that age at marriage of a majority of the respondents was 17 to 20 years and these marriages were purely arranged marriages.

At the relational level, one of the important findings of the study was low satisfaction and conflict between husband and wife. One of the reasons was forced marriage of both male and female partners resulting in low relationship satisfaction and violent behavior. These findings were similar to the study on Marital Satisfaction and Marital Discord conducted by Stith et al. in 2008; they reported an increase in conflict in the marital relationships as an outcome of low marital satisfaction. In most cases, violence was resorted to as a way to deal with conflict. The involvement of in-laws in the couple’s marital life was another dimension mentioned by few studies (Karaoglu et al., 2005; Yüksel-Kaptanoğlu et al., 2012) and our own findings also narrated that strong influence of in-laws, especially involvement of mothers and sister of the husband, was found to build about the negative attitudes toward daughters and preference to son. And in a few other cases, dowry was one of the reasons appearing out of the analysis (Srinivasan & Bedi, 2007). The findings of this study supported this fact of dowry as a reason for violence and acid throwing, but in our study, it additionally came out as a marketing strategy of the son on the part of the groom’s family. From the female parents’ side, this was obligation shirking to permanently get rid of the responsibility of the women, though in most cases it did not work. Girls were pressurized by husbands and in-laws. When these demands were not fulfilled, they frequently faced violence and even thrown acid or burnt. In both situations, these were cultural practices that endorsed these behaviors and led toward such incidents.

Bad peer influence and use of alcohol and drug were found as other factors that increased the risk of brutal violence. These results were similar to the study conducted by the European Commission in 2010 in which drug abuse and specifically alcoholism were described as indicative risk factors of violence. In our study, this was specifically found in the cases that acid was thrown in anger and substance was provided by friends. At the relational level, lack of social support before and after the incident was also found in most of the cases. After marriage, girls were sent to their in-laws with the message that now their lives were of their husbands and, in any case, they had to live with them. Although pursuing this ideology even after the incident of acid throwing, after getting emergency treatment, families did not proceed with further treatment or any follow-up in police or court. Rather they preferred closing of case on social pressure. These findings, in general, supported the previous studies where daughters were considered as a burden, and after marriage, they were considered as members of another family (Haberland et al., 2003; Jensen & Thornton, 2003). However, the present study threw light on the overall degenerative process of norms of humanism that did not consider women as a human who needed equal support, health, and justice.

The second major objective of this study was to investigate the community-level factors which were involved in the practice of acid throwing and the way community and related workplaces responded to the incident. Our study identified the poor socioeconomic conditions as a strong reason behind the act of violence and acid throwing. It did not mean that violence or act of acid throwing was only limited to poor class but living in extreme poverty created stressful living experiences. As discussed in the relational-level factor, in our society, men were not socialized in a way to control their anger and aggression. So to channelize their hostility, they become perpetrators. Same findings were shared by Jewkes in 2002 and Uthman, Moradi, and Lawoko in 2009; these studies explained when men failed to meet the cultural expectations of breadwinning and when they became hostile and violent. But this was not just limited to an individual level, neighborhood or community’s constant resource deprivation, low income and limited employment opportunities in the form of community instability led toward reactive behaviors (Benson et al., 2003; Li et al., 2010).

Lack of social support after marriage (Jensen & Thornton, 2003) extended even after the incident. After the incident, women again became dependent on family. This support lacked either in case of medical follow-up or police follow-up and rehabilitation. This lacking again provided immunity to the perpetrators. The findings of the study on dimensions of violence by Tekkas Kerman and Betrus (2018) endorsed the fact that families adhered to the old customs of not accepting the women back when they were alive. But the studies lacked the evidence of the way families ignored medication and treatment of the victim and followed up to police. The role of government functionaries was also questionable. However, civil society and at some places nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) provided them facilitation but that number was also negligible.

At macro level, inhibited cultural and social practices of male dominance led toward the acceptance of violence by women. This dominance was learned through family socialization where both genders were taught their specific roles. The same findings were shared by Marshall and Furr (2010) that women who accepted male dominance and patriarchal demands were more vulnerable to torture. The unwritten cultural rules of bearing husbands’ violence were customarily accepted by women. Majority did not resist slapping or beating of husbands or male members as they had the acceptance of this beating at a cultural level. It was also considered as family matter, as studies from India, Iraq, Ethiopia, and Pakistan ascertained these findings (T. S. Ali et al., 2011; Ghouri & Abrar, 2010; Gill et al., 2012; Kasturirangan et al., 2004; Uthman, Lawoko, & Moradi, 2009).

The acceptance of violence was also linked with the falsified religious beliefs of men and women. This falsification of the acceptance of violence came through mothers, mothers-in-law, and local religious leaders’ interpretation that men were solely their head and they had every right to control them through force. These findings were similar to the studies that explained how religion was used as a justification for violence against women (Flood & Pease, 2009; Jasam, 2001; Zakar et al., 2011). But contrary in a way, it looked into foundations of these justifications. This situation became critical when the legal institution further saved the perpetrators while requiring the testimony of some male witnesses. However, in the case of acid attacks, the irony of the situation was that no one got ready to give testimony especially men (Patel, 2010, 2014; Zia, 2002).

Conclusion

This study on acid victims is conducted within the socioecological framework. It concludes that within this framework, a single level could not be explained separately. The findings suggest an interdependent nature of personal, relational situation and macro-level factors. The forced and early marriages led toward conflicting relationships and provoked violent behavior. The cultural acceptance of violence as a norm in low socioeconomic class was more visible. Because of social oppression and falsified religious interpretations of the husband’s rights on wife, women remained vulnerable. And their vulnerability proliferated when they raised their voice for equal rights or economic independence. Lack of social support from parents and in-laws due to the female gender was an outcome of centuries-old tradition and cultural practice of deeming girls as a burden. This nonexistence of social support was also found at an institutional level where women suffered from lacking any medical, legal, and rehabilitative help after the incident. However, this socioecological framework based on qualitative thematic analysis contributed to the catalytic authenticity where stakeholders could start their efforts at an institutional level to sensitize the public about violence and could initiate a social action to address the agenda of social justice.

Study Limitations

This study was qualitative in nature presenting the victims’ views only; in this regard, it is suggested that future studies might also include the perpetrators’ views so that complexly nested issues of violence might come out with both parties’ point of view. This was a qualitative study that identified the themes at personal, relational, community, and society levels. In future, these themes could be used to develop a questionnaire to conduct quantitative studies where factorial analysis could be implied to see which factor was more impactful. Owing to time and resource constraints, we just approached respondents with the help of one organization, there might be a difference in the opinion of respondents who did not get facilitation and rehabilitation services and were not employed and were economically dependent.

Footnotes

Authors’ Note

Sadia Jabeen is faculty member at Virtual University and PhD scholar with University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Sadia Jabeen

Author Biographies

Sadia Jabeen is lecturer of Sociology in Virtual University of Pakistan. She is also PhD scholar at Institute of Social and Cultural Studies, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan. Her research interests include gender issues, marginalization and open and distance learning.

Maria Riaz is PhD scholar at Institute of Social and Cultural Studies, University of the Punjab, Lahore, Pakistan. Her major areas of research include gender based issues, educational choices and cultural differences.

Sonia Omer is assistant professor in the Department of Social Work, University of the Punjab, Lahore. She has attended a number of international conferences and has presented her research papers. Her area of research is gender issues, developmental economics, population planning.

References

Acid Survivors Foundation. (2010). Annual report. http://www.acidsurvivors.org/images/PDF_asf/Annual%20Report-2010.pdf

Acid Survivors Foundation. (2015). Acid violence in Pakistan, a situational analysis. Human Rights Commission of Pakistan.

Ali

P. A.

Gavino

M. I. B.

(2008). Violence against women in Pakistan: A framework for analysis. Journal-Pakistan Medical Association, 58(4), 198–203.

Ali

T. S.

Asad

Mogren

Krantz

(2011). Intimate partner violence in urban Pakistan: Prevalence, frequency, and risk factors. International Journal of Women’s Health, 3, 105–115.

Anwary

(2003). Acid violence and medical care in Bangladesh: Women’s activism as carework. Gender & Society, 17(2), 305–313.

Babur

Z. U.

(2007). Violence against women in Pakistan: Current realities and strategies for change [Unpublished dissertation for Masters of Arts Degree in Peace and Conflict Studies, European University Center for Peace Studies].

Bandyopadhyay

Khan

M. R.

(2003). Loss of face: Violence against women in South Asia. In Manderson

Bennett

L. R.

(Eds.), Violence against women in Asian societies (pp. 61–75). Routledge.

Benson

M. L.

Fox

G. L.

DeMaris

Van Wyk

(2003). Neighborhood disadvantage, individual economic distress and violence against women in intimate relationships. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 19(3), 207–235.

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

10.

Bronfenbrenner

(1994). Ecological models of human development. In Peterson

Tierney

Baker

McGaw

(Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (pp. 37–42). Elsevier.

11.

Bronfenbrenner

(2000). Developmental science in the 21st century: Emerging questions, theoretical models, research designs and empirical findings. Social Development, 9(1), 115–125.

12.

Bronfenbrenner

Morris

P. A.

(1998). The ecology of developmental processes. In Damon

Lerner

R. M.

(Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 993–1028). Wiley.

13.

Crotty

(1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Sage.

14.

Denzin

N. K.

Lincoln

L. S.

(2003). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials (2nd ed.). Sage.

15.

Esterberg

K. G.

(2002). Qualitative methods in social research. McGraw-Hill.

16.

European Commission. (2010). Domestic violence against women report 2010. Directorate-General for Justice, Freedom and Security.

17.

Fereday

Muir-Cochrane

(2008). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92.

18.

Flick

(2006). An introduction to qualitative research (3rd ed.). Sage.

19.

Flood

Pease

(2009). Factors influencing attitudes to violence against women. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 10(2), 125–142.

20.

Ghouri

A. M.

Abrar

(2010). The women violence in Pakistan: Evidence from rural and urban areas. European Journal of Social Sciences, 16(2), 267–274.

21.

Gill

A. K.

Begikhani

Hague

(2012). “Honour”-based violence in Kurdish communities. Women’s studies international forum (Vol. 35, No. 2, pp. 75–85). Pergamon Press.

22.

Guerrero

(2013). Burns due to acid assaults in Bogotá, Colombia. Burns, 39(5), 1018–1023.

23.

Gulrez

(2016). Living with facial disability: The experiences of female survivors of acid attack in Pakistan. https://mspace.lib.umanitoba.ca/bitstream/handle/1993/31242/Gulrez%20__Huma.pdf?sequence=3

24.

Haberland

Chong

Bracken

(2003, December 9–12). Married adolescents: An overview [Paper presentation]. WHO/UNFPA/Population Council Technical Consultation on Married Adolescents, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.

25.

Heise

L. L.

(1998). Violence against women: An integrated, ecological framework. Violence Against Women, 4(3), 262–290.

26.

Jasam

(2001). Honour, shame & resistance. ASR Publications.

27.

Jensen

Thornton

(2003). Early female marriage in the developing world. Gender & Development, 11(2), 9–19.

28.

Jewkes

(2002). Intimate partner violence: Causes and prevention. The Lancet, 359(9315), 1423–1429.

29.

Karaoglu

Celbis

Ercan

Ilgar

Pehlivan

Gunes

… Egri

(2005). Physical, emotional and sexual violence during pregnancy in Malatya, Turkey. European Journal of Public Health, 16(2), 149–156.

30.

Kasturirangan

Krishnan

Riger

(2004). The impact of culture and minority status on women’s experience of domestic violence. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 5(4), 318–332.

31.

Khan

Hussain

(2008). Violence against women in Pakistan: Perceptions and experiences of domestic violence. Asian Studies Review, 32(2), 239–253.

32.

Khoshnami

M. S.

Mohammadi

Rasi

H. A.

Khankeh

H. R.

Arshi

(2017). Conceptual model of acid attacks based on survivor’s experiences: Lessons from a qualitative exploration. Burns, 43(3), 608–618.

33.

Leaper

(2013). “Parents’ Socialization of Gender in Children.” In Martin

C. L.

(Topic Ed.), Tremblay

R. E.

Boivin

Peters

R. D.

(Series Eds.), Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development. Montreal, Quebec: Centre of Excellence for Early Childhood Development and Strategic Knowledge Cluster on Early Child Development. http://www.childencyclopedia.com/documents/LeaperANGxp1.pdf

34.

Kirby

R. S.

Sigler

R. T.

Hwang

S. S.

LaGory

M. E.

Goldenberg

R. L.

(2010). A multilevel analysis of individual, household, and neighborhood correlates of intimate partner violence among low-income pregnant women in Jefferson County, Alabama. American Journal of Public Health, 100(3), 531–539.

35.

Malik

A. J.

Khan

K. A.

(2013). An investigation to the emotional life of acid burnt victims and statistics [Presentation slides]. http://www.slideshare.net/AhmedJalalMalik/research-on-acid-burn-victims-in-pakistan

36.

Mannan

Ghani

Clarke

White

Salmanta

Butler

P. E. M.

(2006). Psychosocial outcomes derived from an acid burned population in Bangladesh, and comparison with Western norms. Burns, 32(2), 235–241.

37.

Marshall

G. A.

Furr

L. A.

(2010). Factors that affect women’s attitudes toward domestic violence in Turkey. Violence and Victims, 25(2), 265–277.

38.

Nasreen

(2012, July, 14). Our men throw acid in our faces, destroy our lives but we never stop loving men (Warning: Violent images) [Web log post]. Freethoughtblogs.com. https://freethoughtblogs.com/taslima/2012/07/14/our-men-throw-acid-in-our-faces-destroy-our-lives-but-we-never-stop-loving-men/

39.

Page

(2005). No justice for Pakistan acid victims. The Age Correspondent. https://www.theage.com.au/world/no-justice-for-pakistans-acid-victims-20050215-gdzkae.html

40.

Panchanadeswaran

Koverola

(2005). The voices of battered women in India. Violence Against Women, 11(6), 736–758.

41.

Patel

(2014). A desire to disfigure: Acid attack in India. International Journal of Criminology and Sociological Theory, 7(2), 1–11.

42.

Patel

(2010). Gender equality and women’s empowerment in Pakistan. Oxford University Press.

43.

Rajwani

A. A.

Pachani

N. H. A.

(2015). Early marriage of girls in Pakistan. i-Manager’s Journal on Nursing, 5(3), 13–16.

44.

Senate of Pakistan. (2018). Acid and Burn Crime Act, 2018. http://www.senate.gov.pk/uploads/documents/1527223731_946.pdf

45.

Sev’er

Yurdakul

(2001). Culture of honor, culture of change: A feminist analysis of honor killings in rural Turkey. Violence Against Women, 7(9), 964–998.

46.

Smith

J. A.

Osborn

(2007). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In Smith

J. A.

(Ed.), Societies (pp. 61–75). Routledge.

47.

Srinivasan

Bedi

A. S.

(2007). Domestic violence and dowry: Evidence from a South Indian village. World Development, 35(5), 857–880.

48.

Stith

S. M.

Green

N. M.

Smith

D. B.

Ward

D. B.

(2008). Marital satisfaction and marital discord as risk markers for intimate partner violence: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Family Violence, 23(3), 149–160.

49.

Tekkas Kerman

Betrus

. (2018). Violence against women in Turkey: a social ecological framework of determinants and prevention strategies. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524838018781104

50.

Temple

Young

(2004). Qualitative research and translation dilemmas. Qualitative Research, 4(2), 161–178.

51.

Uthman

O. A.

Lawoko

Moradi

. (2009). Factors associated with attitudes towards intimate partner violence against women: A comparative analysis of 17 sub-Saharan countries. BMC International Health and Human Rights, 9(1), Article 14.

52.

Uthman

O. A.

Moradi

Lawoko

(2009). The independent contribution of individual-, neighbourhood-, and country-level socioeconomic position on attitudes towards intimate partner violence against women in sub-Saharan Africa: A multilevel model of direct and moderating effects. Social Science & Medicine, 68(10), 1801–1809.

53.

Welsh

(2009). It was like burning in hell: A comparative exploration of acid attack violence [Master’s Thesis, University of North Carolina]. https://search.proquest.com/docview/304958685?pq-origsite=gscholar

54.

Yüksel-Kaptanoğlu

İ.

Türkyılmaz

A. S.

Heise

. (2012). What puts women at risk of violence from their husbands? Findings from a large, nationally representative survey in Turkey. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27(14), 2743–2769.

55.

Zakar

M. Z.

Krämer

(2011). Spousal violence against women in the context of marital inequality: Perspectives of Pakistani religious leaders. International Journal of Conflict and Violence, 5(2), 371–384.

56.

Zia

(2002). Violence against women and their quest for justice ( Mumtaz

S. K.

, Ed.). Simorgh Women’s Resource and Publication Centre.