Abstract
Indonesia has experienced incidents of domestic violence involving partners working in professional fields. The domestic violence has become a critical problem in both developed and developing countries. The number of cases of violence against women (VAW) has been increasing every year. Data from Indonesian National Commission on Violence Against Women year 2020 show that there are 431,471 cases. Earlier studies indicated that high academic and professional status achieved by women can reduce VAW. However, cases of domestic violence reveal that such initiatives are not enough and do not exclude academically and professionally empowered women from being victims of domestic violence. The studies indicate that power relations between husband and wife play a crucial role in determining the incidence of domestic violence in a family. This study aims to reveal power relations in dual-career families experiencing domestic violence in Indonesia. The study deploys the qualitative research method and applies the Connell theory on gender and power. This research was conducted in Surabaya, East Java, Indonesia, and it involved 44 key informants and 34 supporting informants from the general public. The results reveal three categories of power relations between husbands and wives, who faced domestic violence in dual-career families: male-dominated families, female-dominated families and alternating families (i.e., families where the dominant roles of men as husbands and women as wives can change). This study concludes that the ownership of intellectual and economic resources in themselves does not contain the power relations between husband and wife play a critical role in determining the incidence of domestic violence. cases of domestic violence. Based on power relations between husband and wife, alternating family, driven by women’s resistance, is capable of changing the structure of the family. In alternating families, the power of husband and wife are alternated. There are reversed roles between them. Furthermore, it tends to build a new structure where there is no hierarchical family position between women and men. In addition, the structural change will create an equal and ideal family.
Introduction
Gender equality is very important for economic growth in Asian countries (Mishra et al., 2020), and gender discrimination has been an imperative socio-economic and cultural issue against women (Bhattacharyya et al., 2021). Therefore, researching domestic violence or violence against women (VAW) is important because of an escalation in the number of domestic violence cases (Indonesian National Commission on Violence Against Women, 2019). It is found that there were 406,178 cases of VAW in 2019. The cases have increased by 14% compared to the previous year, which had amassed 348,466 cases. The number of cases in 2018 also increased compared to the previous year by as much as 259,150 (Indonesian National Commission on Violence Against Women, 2019). Multiple cases reported that victims of domestic violence are more often among women than men, thereby making women the victims of domestic violence, who are considered as being ‘weak creatures’. Husbands commit domestic violence against wives only because of trivial things related to women’s domestic roles (Hamadani et al., 2020; Holland & Rammohan, 2019; Lentz, 2018). Studies on domestic violence—such as thesis, dissertations and other research studies—have been conducted by previous researchers, but it focused more on law, criminology, psychology, health and culture and found more men as perpetrators and women as victims of domestic violence (Alejo, 2014; Baird, 2017; Bellow et al., 2015; Campbell, 2004; Sedziafa et al., 2016). In various studies that have been conducted, domestic violence is only seen from the number or as cases that are considered normal.
Unlike previous studies, this study is unique in examining sociological factors of domestic violence using the Connell theory of gender and power. Connell (1987) argues that power can enter through societal norms. Society is governed by values and norms developed and socialized over generations. When applied to gender, the core of the power structure is masculinity. Decision-making, sexual acts controlled by men and violence become part of the power in a family. Furthermore, violence is more often a strength in hegemony and an inseparable part of power. In coping with these cases of VAW, the Indonesian Commission on Violence Against Women is handling it through the religious courts in Indonesia (Indonesian National Commission on Violence Against Women, 2020).
Historically, gender-based domestic violence is accepted as ‘normal’ in many societies. However, this concept is beginning to change, partially because of the World Conference on Human Rights, held in Vienna in 1993, and the Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women adopted in the same year. Communities and developing countries’ governments began to acknowledge the significant amount of VAW and paid attention to the issue incorporating it into related human rights policies. It is a violation of fundamental human rights for women, underestimating their ability to be autonomous, which influences their chances of achieving financial independence (Sedziafa et al., 2016).
According to the WHO, domestic violence is, ‘[a]ny act of gender-based violence that is physical, sexual, mental or which inflicts harm to women, including threats, acts, coercion or deprivation of liberty arbitrarily, whether that occurs in public or private life’ (World Health Organization [WHO], 2013). In developed and developing countries, domestic violence is a significant problem (Kuskoff & Parsell, 2020; Ningrum & Mas’udah, 2021; Saud et al., 2021). However, domestic violence is a complex phenomenon, given its structural and systemic nature, and it does not occur randomly. A variety of opinions and agreements on the direct cause of domestic violence adds to its complexity, especially for researchers and policymakers who are interested in finding solutions to this social problem (Etherington & Baker, 2016). Several studies have correlated domestic violence with complex interactions among people and interpersonal influences, family and community factors (Etherington & Baker, 2016). At the community level, gender-biased values and norms, women’s status and autonomy, lack of economic development and poverty are also major determinants of domestic violence (Koenig et al., 2006). A study conducted by Alejo (2014) also stated that domestic violence is physical harm to mental and emotional health (Alejo, 2014). It is influenced by certain social factors, such as economic empowerment, education, active decision-making and community participation. For example, one study found evidence that women who are engaged in economic activities and have substantial control over household assets are less vulnerable to violence (Bhattacharyya et al., 2011).
Domestic violence has a complicated and confidential status that is common in almost all communities. The cases of domestic violence in the community are invariably more as compared to data available in police and media reports. When it comes to the traditional practices, the reporting is weak and victims usually tend to cover up such cases, because it would be considered a symbol of disgrace for them. The domestic violence law in Indonesia requires evidence and witnesses if there are cases of violence reported to the authorities. However, it is difficult to obtain evidence and witnesses in certain incidents. One of the factors is respect in society, which makes women prefer to hide their problems rather than report. Although it is regulated in such a way in Law No. 23 of 2004 (Indonesian Law), concerning the elimination of domestic violence, all forms of domestic violence continue to flourish, not only among the lower classes but also among the middle and upper classes. This happened because of the strong patriarchal culture (Arivia, 2002). In addition, domestic violence is considered an individual problem (Etwiory, 2012).
It is considered that domestic violence is a sociological phenomenon that occurs in our community. It is an important issue that should be studied thoroughly because it is an anti-humanitarian act for domestic lives. Therefore, the current study is important in investigating domestic violence that violates individual and human rights. It is an act of violence with a broader dimension compared to other crimes. It is not only limited to physical crimes—such as beatings, slapping, torturing, and other physical violence—but it can also have non-physical dimensions—such as verbal, psychological and sexual violence. Reality shows that trivial problems commonly trigger domestic violence. In such cases, the existing values in society can also influence one’s thoughts and actions (Bhattacharjee, & Banda, 2016). In Indonesia, data from the Indonesian National Commission on Violence Against Women (2019) shows that the occupations of the perpetrators and that of the victims of domestic violence vary; some are working as teachers, state officials/bureaucrats, military officers, police, entrepreneurs and private employees from different levels of education. There are many perpetrators and victims whose education are not mentioned because it was not reported. This data shows that violence is not only perpetrated or experienced by those with low education. Many of those who have higher education are also perpetrators and victims.
Considering the discussion on domestic violence, Indonesian society considers men to be strong creatures and, therefore, they deserve to be the perpetrators rather than the victims. However, some studies have shown that men also become victims of domestic violence (Drijber et al., 2013; Huntley et al., 2019). For instance, women commit violence in their defence from men in the patriarchal system and seek relief from their problems (Aplin, 2019). Talcott Parsons in his role and action theory posed that women are more expressive, whereas men are more instrumental in their roles which can be witnessed in the work of Augsburger and Maercker (2019), indicating that women put their emotions first in such circumstances—that is, when they feel hurt, stressed or threatened—hence they spontaneously attack their partners. Acts of violence committed by women on men are proportional to the discomfort (Schuster et al., 2020). Studies have documented that women are more likely to use weapons to attack their partner compared to men, who often use their hands (Boxall et al., 2020; Velopulos et al., 2019).
The movement of studies on domestic violence continues to grow with various focus studies and produces varied findings. In Bangladesh, women choose to live with domestic violence, to maintain family unity, although it is often marked by violence (Bellow et al., 2015). Related to this violence, several studies have found that domestic violence perpetrated by husbands is generally mental and physical (Bradbury-Jones & Isham, 2020; Das et al., 2020; Kwiatkowski, 2018). Another fact shows that early marriages are more at risk of experiencing domestic violence (Semahegn et al., 2019). Domestic violence is caused because the husband wants to maintain his power in society (Fajardo-Gonzalez, 2020; Haque et al., 2020; Parkinson, 2017).
One of the important indicator to change the social pattern of the society is ‘education’. This can help to transform gender relations (Dhakal et al., 2014). The data presented in a study by Dhakal et al. (2014) shows that a higher educational or professional status achieved by women is an important indicator of women empowerment; however, it does not prevent women free from being victims of domestic violence. This reality shows a paradox between discourse (both that developed in society and that carried out by the state through law) and reality, where not all families are idealized. In a family that is ideally a safe and comfortable place for its members, domestic violence can occur, including in dual-career families that are considered to be ideal families of a community. The fact that violence can also occur in dual-career families is a particularly interesting phenomenon in Indonesian society.
Considering the social institution, among others, family is the primary and the first step of socialization for future generations as well as a means to educate healthy, intelligent and quality human resources. Families should also protect individual rights, regardless of sex (male or female). The family ideally becomes safer and the most comfortable place for family members and the primary socialization agent for individuals. However, families indeed socialize to reduce violence, both intentionally and unintentionally, towards individuals. The existing discourse in the community socialized through family also raises and perpetuates domestic violence.
This analysis seeks to reveal the power relationship between husbands and wives in dual-career families, who faced domestic violence, and it deploys the theoretical model of Raewyn Connell and her theory of gender and power. It states that three major social structures characterized the gendered relationship between men and women: (a) sexual division of labour, (b) division of power and (c) the structure of cathexis (Wingood & DiClemente, 2000).
In reality, there are many cases of domestic violence in various social classes in Asia. At the state level, gender justice is determined by various state policies, while at the family level, gender equality is related to the power relations between men and women. One of the efforts to achieve gender justice is to increase women’s opportunities in education and work (Bhattacharyya et al., 2021; Mishra et al., 2020). The current study seeks to uncover how the power relations between husband and wife in dual-career families experience domestic violence. Studies on domestic violence are usually carried out on the lower class and women as victims. This study is very interesting because it seeks to dismantle the power relations of husband and wife in dual-career families who experience domestic violence, with the general assumption that dual-career families are representatives of gender equality and are considered ideal families and having fewer chances of domestic violence.
Furthermore, a dual-career family represents a good character of a family, in which the husband and wife work and pursue professional careers with defined career paths. In a dual-career family—based on education, professionalism and an increasing number of women entering the public sphere—discourse about ideal families and gender equality is more clearly realized, which is considered a core argument of the study.
This article explores the causes of domestic violence among dual-career families in Indonesia. The results provide theoretical and practical support to the overall discussion on the power and gender relationship between husband and wife. It further discusses the thematic analysis of power and gender relationship with multiple cases of domestic violence. The remaining of the study expands the discussions of these findings, however, description the interviews and methodology deployed for this purpose.
Research Methods
This study employs a qualitative method to understand the power relations of husbands and wives. It seeks to uncover the reality behind the ‘pseudo-reality’. This research was conducted in Surabaya, Indonesia, which is a metropolitan city where men and women get more opportunities to acquire higher education and professional careers. An increasing trend of fast social change in Surabaya, including changes in families and other fields, means that power relations within families are especially interesting, requiring more in-depth investigation.
Participants Selection
This study aims to explore the power relationships in dual-career families. The males and females are engaged in hospitals, universities, senior high schools, junior high schools, prosecutor’s offices, government offices, enterprises, private offices, police stations and bank offices. The participants in this study were chosen deliberately according to the objectives of the study. The inclusion criteria of the informants are as follows: (a) the husband and wife are highly educated (minimum of an undergraduate degree); (b) pursue professional work (for example, doctors, lecturers, teachers, prosecutors, bureaucrats, enterprises [BUMN] employees, company heads, nurses, police, banks and private employees); and (c) the husband or wife has experienced domestic violence (as a victim or perpetrator). The informants were approached through the snowball technique.
It is very sensitive to investigate cases of domestic violence. Despite the availability and meeting the criteria of the participant, it was not easy to gather data due to the non-willingness of victims of domestic violence. Thus, 44 participants were interviewed for addressing the purpose of the study and research questions. The researcher also interviewed other people (supporting informants) associated with the informants who knew about the incidence of violence among the informants’ families. There were 34 supporting informants, who became supporters in this study, consisting of family members, neighbours and friends. The total number of key and supporting informants in this study was 78. The study emphasizes depth, variety and richness of data.
In-Depth Interviews
Keeping in view the phenomena of the study, in-depth interviews were conducted to gather the data from informants using a semi-structured questionnaire (interview guide). In addition, the research conducted a triangulation to avoid bias during the data collection. This triangulation was carried out by conducting interviews with people associated with the informant, including family members, neighbours, co-workers and the organization where the informant was involved. This process was intended to identify and collect a more in-depth and comprehensive study on the ideal family discourse and power relations of husbands and wives in dual-career families.
Procedure of Data Analysis
Data analysis was carried out through several stages. First, interviews were transcribed and categorized, based on the research themes and objectives. Second, data analysis was carried out by discussing and dialoguing the findings using relevant previous studies. In addition, the data obtained through the results of the interviews were sorted to obtain theme-based categorization, based on data findings in the field. Moreover, the data was analysed by theoretical discussion between data and theory to obtain conclusions from the results of the study. As a theoretical implication, this research produces a new concept in the study under the sociology of family. This novel concept is abstracted from research data and reflected in the conclusion.
Theoretical Framework
In 1987, Connell developed the theories of sexual inequality and gender and power imbalances. She identified the critical components of existing theories and developed a combinative theory of gender and power. According to her, three major structure which characterize the gendered relationship are as follows: sexual division of labour, sexual division of power and the structure of cathexis. According to Connell’s thinking, the family includes three structures, namely the sexual division of labour, power and catechism. The sexual division of labour at home is of course very clear when it is seen from who gives birth to children and who works in the household. The power within the family may not be obvious, but the influence of decision-making, male-dominated sexual acts and domestic violence is evident. Catechists enter the family through the Oedipus complex or family emotional connection (Connell, 1987, p. 124). In fact, sexual division of labour and gender inequalities are rooted in society through numerous abstract, historical and sociopolitical forces that consistently segregate power and ascribe social norms based on gender-determined roles. Connell recognizes that there are contradictions within the family institution, for example, a woman having more power than a man and that these contradictions can change the structure.
The present study deploys the theory of gender and power; that how the dual-career families are facing domestic violence. Most people have an intuitive notion of what power means. Power is often demonstrated through the actions of a single individual, and to find activities beyond the actions of individuals and a collection of social relationships may be difficult (Connell, 1987, p. 107). The core of the power structure in gender relations is masculinity. Violence is often the main force in hegemony, it is an integral part of social power and is often neglected. When applied to gender, the essence of power structure is masculinity, such as rules that are formed through culture and its establishment by the community itself. (Connell, 1987, p. 109).
Although Connell argues that gender relations always exist in institutions, he is more focused on gender actions in certain community institutions, such as the family. Conservatives view the family as the foundation of society, but the family is more accurately seen as a complex social institution. Based on her idea, power in the family may not be obvious, but the influence of decision-making, sexual acts controlled by men and domestic violence is visible (Connell, 1987, p. 124). Connell acknowledges that there are contradictions in family institutions, for example, a woman with more power than a man is a contradiction that can change the structure.
Results and Discussion
This study reveals power relations between husband and wife in dual-career families who experience domestic violence. In this study, the power relations referred to the power relations between husband and wife that occurs in dual-career families who experience domestic violence, by looking at who has a dominant role in the family based on victims and perpetrators of violence. The narrations show how decisions are made in terms of economic, social, sexual and domestic work divisions. In other words, this study explores power relations between husbands and wives regarding their role of dominant, dominated and changes in dominance. Power relations in dual-career families are interesting because with the development of globalization, more opportunities for women to obtain higher education increasingly pave the way for women to enter the public domain.
In addition, with higher education, women have the opportunity to obtain professional work in society. In the private domain, although women can get education and work that is equal to or greater than that of men, this does not guarantee that women will be free from being victims of domestic violence. Therefore, this study uncovers the gendered power relations within dual-career families experiencing domestic violence.
Types of Family and Power Relations of Dual-Career Families Experienced Domestic Violence
The concept of power relations has been discussed thoroughly in Tables 2 and 3. Which illustrates the sociological dimension of family types and power relations, as it was researched in this study are, alternating family (AF), dual-career families, and MDFs and FDFs. The data collection in the field indicates that the gendered power relations in dual-career families do not always take the form of domination by an individual over another individual (husband over wife or wife over husband). This study finds a new category of husband and wife relations, where at a certain time both the husband and the wife change their roles of dominance in the family.
In this study, the number of the subject informants was 44. This study found three categories of power relations between husbands and wives in dual-career families which experienced domestic violence: male-dominated family (MDF) with 16 informants, female-dominated family (FDF) with 16 informants and alternating family (AF) with 12 informants. Data shown in Table 1 shows that the victim has experienced several incidences of violence. The forms of violence in dual-career families are physical, psychological, economic and sexual violence. The data portrayed that the victims of domestic violence had experienced more than one form of violence.
Domestic Violence Among Dual-Career Families
Domestic Violence Among Dual-Career Families
Male-dominated Families
The concept of MDFs illustrates that men have a more dominant role in the family. Studies on domestic violence in various countries have revealed that experiencing domestic violence has been a decisive factor for women in committing suicide (Hassanian-Moghaddam et al., 2016; Kuhlman et al., 2016). Domestic violence where women are the victims shows that women are often subject to various forms of violence by their husbands. In this context, the family is dominated by men and women in their role as wives receive inappropriate treatment from their partners repeatedly.
Female-dominated Families
The concept of FDFs illustrates that women typically have a more dominant role and become possible perpetrators of violence against men. In dual-career families, the man does not always dominate the woman. This comprehensive study finds that women can also play a dominant role and commit violence against men. Thus, to support the findings of the study, the number of male victims of domestic violence is no greater than that of women (Thureau et al., 2015). However, the men could experience violence and be dominated by women. The violence committed by women against men can take the form of physical, psychological and verbal, economic, and sexual violence.
Unlike MDFs, where physical violence is experienced more by women, this form of violence (physical) does not occur frequently in FDFs. This study finds that men experience more psychological and verbal violence, including being insulted, abused, humiliated and despised. Their extended families are sometimes insulted and they are often kept away from the family. In addition, they are prohibited from using social media, mobile phones, limited in their social interactions and restricted in their work. Men may also experience economic violence, including not being given sufficient money or transportation money, are often limited in their spending, are forced to work hard, meet tertiary needs and find extra money for making their wives’ pleased and happy.
In addition to psychological, verbal and economic violence, this study reveals sexual violence experienced by men. Interestingly, sexual violence does not take the form of violence where a wife forced her husband into having sexual relations. This study finds that men feel that they are sexually abused when they cannot meet their sexual needs. The woman does not want to satisfy their sexual needs anymore or stops providing sexual favours for a variety of reasons such as being tired, lazy or moody.
Alternating Family
An AF is a type of family where the dominant roles of a man and a woman as husband and wife may change. Sometimes men become the perpetrators of violence towards women, and at other times, women become the perpetrators of domestic violence against men. This category has a more fluid relationship than the first two categories. In the first category, the family is dominated by men, and it further shows the dominant role of women. The resistance of women victims of violence is an effort to escape the cycle of violence. Female independence is an important contribution to equality (Mas’udah, 2020).
Power Relations of Husbands and Wives in Dual-Career Families
The power relations of husbands and wives in dual-career families which experience domestic violence are explained in the following two sections. The first to be explained is husband and wife relations in the socio-economic field, and the second comprises a division of domestic roles between husbands and wives.
The discussion in each of the following sections is based on the category of power relations between husbands and wives in dual-career families which experience domestic violence, as shown in Table 2.
The Categorization of Power Relations
Dominant roles in families are not always based on the power of one over another. Certain categories of families are dominated by men (MDFs), and some families are dominated by women (FDFs). Furthermore, this study recognizes the third category of power relations known as ‘AFs’. It is a novel concept in the study of the sociology of the family.
Further, the AF emerges due to resistance from the victim. There is an assumption prevailing among women that there will be a way to reduce the violence and the perpetrators of violence will also end it. If during all this time, patriarchy has been strongly embedded in women where, as wives, they must obey their husbands, then there should be an awareness among women that violence cannot be tolerated. Another study found that the factors influencing domestic violence include a transformation in women’s lives, social environment, their partner’s income level and participation in an organization (Kabeer, 2011).
This study finds that in dual-career families, there are numerous things that women victims can do to increase their capacity to fight male domination. With an increased bargaining position, women cannot always be dominated by men.
The findings in Table 2 regarding the categorization of the power relations between husbands and wives in dual-career families who experience domestic violence are abstracted into the sociological concepts in Table 3.
Sociological Concepts of Power Relations Between Male and Female in Dual-Career Families Experiencing Domestic Violence
The power relations of husbands and wives in terms of children’s education are considerably varied. In MDFs, the husband becomes the decision-maker in the children’s education, while the wife is obliged to take care of the children’s education, but if there are discrepancies related to the children’s education, the husband blames his wife. This is revealed by one of an informant, Diah, who states, ‘I take care of my children, but my husband is the one who regulates. He accuses me if anything happens to our children’.
In FDFs, the wife determines all decisions regarding the children’s education. Although the husband provides input, decisions concerning the children’s education remain determined by the wife. In AFs, the husband and wife decide on children’s education together; while the wife takes care of all matters relating to the children’s education, the husband remains a decision-maker.
Related to the socialization of the children, in MDFs, the husband directs the wife in socializing the child, as the wife is considered to be a caregiver. This study shows that the family is dominated by men, and that women are managed by their husbands. The patriarchal ideology in this family set-up is extremely strong. Women are obliged to socialize with their children because childcare is considered to be in the domestic domain. In FDFs, the wife is dominant in socializing with the children. The decision to socialize with the children is absolutely in the hands of the women. As End says, ‘[m]y wife, she said that I don’t have to take part’.
In an AF, the wife socializes with the child, whereas the husband can only apportion blame. He does not want to help, and all processes are carried out by the wife. As the participant, Tiwi states, ‘[c]hildcare is my job, Miss. I take care of it. My husband usually blames me’.
Several families that are categorized as AFs involve husbands and wives working together in socializing their children as a team. Therefore, in AFs, the power relations between husbands and wives, in terms of socializing the children, indicate more equality compared to MDFs and FDFs. Even so, there are families that still hold strong patriarchal ideologies. As Ima states, ‘[m]y husband and I take care of our children because it encompasses their future, Miss. My husband is the father of our children, so it’s our responsibility, for both of us’.
The relation of a husband and wife in socio-economic fields vary greatly. Based on data obtained from the field, there are two variations in the decision-makers in terms of finances in MDFs.
The first variation is the wife who becomes the decision-maker in matters of household finances. All financial requirements and needs are to be fulfilled by her. The husband does not provide a living or gives only a small amount of money that is sufficient to meet a small portion of the family’s financial expenses. Mon explains, ‘[h]e does not give money at all. I have to bear all the expenditures’. Ama also experienced a similar condition saying, ‘[my husband] never gives (money), Miss. Everything is on me.’ Yani also experienced a similar situation stating, ‘[t]here is no financial support from my husband. All my needs are fulfilled by my salary, Miss’. In contrast to those who are not provided with a living by their husbands, Uas still receives a living from her husband, although not much, stating, ‘[m]y husband gives money, but not much. I use to pay for the rest’.
The second variation is husband who determines decisions concerning the household finances. In this variation, the husband decides about the household finances because he controls the economic resources (family property). As Ida states, ‘[m]y husband makes all decisions, he determines everything. He fulfils all needs, even though he nags, insults and is very rude to me’. Bin said that she was economically overly controlled by her husband saying, ‘[m]y husband always asks for financial reports every month. Everything has to be detailed, Miss. Everything should be written down. Even though it is my salary, I was told to report to him’.
The increase in the quality of the wife’s career is not accompanied by the quality of her bargaining position and the husband still has the power to control the wife’s finances (Wolley, 2000). Money is one of the components in a marriage that is held firmly, and the existence of poor financial control of one partner shows that there is dissatisfaction in the marriage (Dew et al., 2012). The husband’s power over the wife’s finances is a form of hierarchy in marriage, where the husband has the power to control his wife in any way (Atwood, 2012).
Based on the data, these results reveal that working women are prone to experiencing economic violence. A number of the informants said that they received small amounts of money from their husbands’ incomes. Other informants claimed that they did not receive any money from their husbands and that they attempted to meet the family’s financial needs alone.
In FDFs, this study finds two variations in determining economic decisions. First, the wife becomes a decision-maker in the finances because the economic resources are managed by her. As one of the informants stated, ‘[m]y wife is the one who controls everything, including my wealth’. The wife’s power over the husband’s finances arises from disagreements in the marital relationship, such as problematic joint decision-making (Dew & Dakin, 2011). Money is a symbol of prestige and power, so it is used by women to reproduce gender relations towards their husbands (Deutsch et al., 2003).
Second, the husband and wife determine economic decisions. Although the role of the wife in this type of family is dominant, those who determine decisions over household finances are the husbands and wives. This happens because the wife and husband both have economic resources. As Ian relates, ‘[y]es we are together, we usually decide’. Among FDFs, men tend to be less active and weak in decisions. In these families, men are not dominant in determining financial decisions. If both the husband and wife have economic resources, they will regulate decisions together.
In AFs, there are two decision-makers regarding household finances. First, the wife determines financial decisions because she is responsible for all financial matters. Although the wife administers all the finances, the husband does not want to know if there are deficiencies in fulfilling financial responsibilities because he assumes that all these responsibilities will be managed by his wife. The husband does not care about the family’s financial problems, as he hands these over to his wife, but he does not want to know whether the family’s financial needs are met. This is experienced by Nil who states, ‘[h]e never gave me full salary. It is not sufficient for the family. Only enough for the children’s schools. I pay for my kids’ tutor fee, daily food, etc. If there is a sudden need, I have to meet it by myself’.
Nil still receives financial support from her husband, even though it is not enough to cover her monthly expenses. Another participant, Wild, adds that her husband never supported her financially. Her husband often asks for money from her. She states that her husband never gives, and that he is always interested to buy expensive things, such as cars, a collection of wristwatches, gadgets, accessories to look attractive, but that her focus is to reduce extra expenses. For outings with the family, her husband gets them to stay in hotels and seeks expensive places to stay when travelling. ‘One day, I asked him, how much is your salary? He said around seven million (IDR) a month. After this, he raised the argument that, “I am paying utilities and children’s snacks, which didn’t make any sense, but again asks me for money”’.
This study on dual-career families shows that higher education and women’s work profession does not bring women out of violence. Domestic violence is not only carried out on women who come from lower classes. Career women experience various forms of violence as well. Domestic violence still occurs in any class because of patriarchy. Few other studies reinforce the fact that violence experienced by women sometimes does not recognize social class backgrounds (Bimrose, 2019; Hajare, 2018), and that social norms in society create opportunities for violence to occur (Heise & Kotsdam, 2015). This study of power relations in a dual-career family further finds that a man chooses to marry a career woman because he will not hand over his salary to his wife. Men can enjoy the results of their work. By marrying career women, men do not need to support the family needs.
Women’s resistance has led to a more equal relationship between husbands and wives (Mas’udah, 2020). Family fulfilment is determined together because it involves a shared life. Participant ‘Ima’ shares her experience saying,
I used to deal with the money deficit. He [my husband] never wanted to know. If there was a lack of money, he always used to blame me. He used to argue that I couldn’t arrange finances and accused me of all sorts. Once I asked him to take care of the expenditures, but he refused. We get confused if there is a sudden need. Since I fought back, I asked him to take responsibility too, for example, expenses. Finally, he agreed, although I still get bothered. At least he knows.
Family assets in MDFs are held by the wife, whereas some are held by the husband or both. In MDFs, the property is owned by wives before marriage (inheritance or savings). If obtained after marriage, the property is controlled by the husband. The husband and wife’s possessions are those owned before marriage. This study shows that although women have resources, these resources do not necessarily reduce male VAW.
In FDFs, the wife owns and controls the family property (house, land, car, etc.). Assets are held by the husband and wife because ownership of the property in the name of the husband is gained before marriage. Assets obtained after the marriage are controlled by the wife.
In AFs, equality in terms of property ownership is more visible. Some family assets are held by the husband and the wife, although there are also assets held only by the husband or the wife. It needs to be understood that ownership is quite complex. Some individuals enter a marriage by bringing assets obtained both from parents and work before the marriage. However, some start a family life from scratch (without owning property).
Moreover, numerous studies have found that certain of the causes of domestic violence perpetrated by husbands are having lack of education, low socio-economic status, difficulty in becoming the ‘ideal husband’ and jealousy when wives talk to other men (Hajare, 2018; Priya et al., 2019; Sheikhbardsiri et al., 2017). This current study further shows that not only men with low education and economy but women also commit violence to gain power in the family.
Another previous study shows that rural areas are at risk of experiencing domestic violence than urban areas due to cultural, educational and economic factors (Nadda et al., 2018). Furthermore, the current study finds that domestic violence in urban areas also occurs among educated families where the husband and wife have professional careers, because of the strong patriarchal culture.
Power Relations of Husbands and Wives in the Division of Domestic Roles Within Dual-Career Families
This study deploys Connell’s thoughts on gender and power (1987) to look at domestic violence and the forms and actions of victims when experiencing violence. Connell argues that power can influence societal norms and values.
Connell (1987) points out the historical dynamics of gender. Gender historicity is more than just social change, but change is shaped through different actions. These changes that come through the agency always lie within historical contexts, and the process has not always been smooth. The family structure is the ‘vehicle’ through which masculinity and femininity can emerge as simultaneous patterns, not individual choices and gains. All of these are created, linked to one another and are organized in society. Thus, structure subverts the individual through social interaction, and it frames, forces and confines the individuals. It is important to study the distribution of the roles of husband and wife in dual-career families experiencing family violence to determine how power relationships a practice in the private sphere. This study finds a strong patriarchal ideology and a varied division of domestic work. The patriarchal ideology among dual-career families within a male-dominated culture can be seen from the following viewpoints: the wife’s obedience to the husband; the wife as the person in charge of domestic work; responsibility for child safety; caretaker of goods, property and household finances; and responsibility for housekeeping. In FDFs, patriarchal ideology is that the wife does not serve her husband, she is not responsible for the domestic work, the husband serves himself, and the husband is not satisfied in terms of sexual needs, with the domestic work being done by the servants.
In AFs, a patriarchal system still exists, although in this category, the wife is aware and can fight against violence. The patriarchal ideology in AFs states the following: the wife is responsible for the domestic work (the wife considers it as a woman’s duty); the wife serves her husband proper meals, in terms of the kitchen chores, wellness and bed; but the wife does not want to serve her husband in terms of the kitchen, well, and the mattress when violence occurs; and the husband at a certain time wants to help with the domestic work, but this happens rarely.
From the aspect of labour division, in MDFs, women do all the domestic chores, and the husbands rarely help them. In FDFs, men do all the domestic chores. However, when men do not have time, the domestic work is handed over to servants. In AFs, women do all the domestic chores. As Wild says, ‘I am doing everything [domestic chores], such as preparing breakfast, cleaning the house, washing and ironing too, and he never helps me’.
I give him space when he doesn’t agree, but he doesn’t begin any initiative. In many ways, I am dominant. When I disobey him, he gets very angry. He often hurts me. I am dominant because he doesn’t want to do anything. He is lazy. About domestic matters, he doesn’t want to know anything.
However, the husband wants to help the wife in domestic work when she is in a dominant position. As Ima says, ‘[w]hen I am angry, he wants to help, do the dishes and clean the bathroom. But, yes rarely. I still do most of the work’.
In some countries in which society justifies the beating of wives, dominant patriarchal values and the subordination of women have a high level of domestic violence (Hidrobo & Fernald, 2013). This study confirms that domestic violence occurs because of strong patriarchal values that become the discourse of the community and are the cause of perpetual domestic violence.
Another study states that norms and laws seem to foster domestic violence in a society. However, improving the economy can make women avoid violence because not all women who suffer from violence are impoverished (Heise & Kotsdam, 2015). The findings of this study indicate that poverty is not a major cause of domestic violence. Dual-career families who are formally educated also continue to experience violence. In this context, female victims of violence are not only highly educated but also have an income that is often greater than that of their husbands and meet all the needs of the family, because the husbands do not provide it. This violence continues to occur and is part of the dual-career family life due to a strong patriarchal ideology.
This study also conducted data triangulation by interviewing supporting informants, from other family members, neighbours or friends/colleagues of the informants. Sev, Tiwi’s younger sister, explains that she learned about the violence her sister experienced because she used to stay at her sister’s house. Sev states,
My sister has been experiencing violence for a long time, but I kept silent at first. I know this from my daily experience when I used to live at her place. Over time, this violence became worse. Finally, my sister dared to fight back. Since my sister dared to fight back, their relationship got gradually better and became more satisfactory.
The violence experienced by Ima is also known to Lia, Ima’s neighbour, friend and colleague at the office. Lia said that after Ima stopped a fight, the relationship between Ima and her husband became much better. Lia states,
Ima no longer experiences violence since she fought back. Their relationship became more egalitarian, and I have become witness to this for more than 10 years. Previously, Ima often felt depressed and cried, but now Ima is more independent and can live freely.
Theoretically, based on Connell’s thinking, she argues that power enters through norms (Connell, 1987). In families, in particular, power enters through norms shaped by interactions among the family members. Parents teach their children to become good men and women through socialization based on the norms of society. These norms-imbued socialization practices later become a discourse. Such discourse shapes the power relations between men and women, to a point that man-to-woman violence is justified and considered legal. Men commit VAW to strengthen their power. Then the society reinforces such practices by requiring men and women to perform their roles according to the socialized norms.
Currently, women have the same opportunities as men in terms of education and employment. However, society’s view of the position of women has not changed significantly. Society still sees women as second-class citizens. Women continue to experience oppression and domination by men, especially in households. This view is not only a perception among the uneducated members of society but also among the educated and professional classes. Sometimes, women who become victims of domestic violence blame themselves and consider themselves as the problems that provoke violence. Moreover, these women also blame themselves for not being able to be good wives and mothers.
Power is often demonstrated through the actions of one individual against another (Connell, 1987). Power is a very important part of social integrity, but this ‘invisible force’ is rarely seen. In the context of this current study on dual-career families, in MDFs, victims of domestic violence often become the object of blame. When women become victims, they are blamed for being unable to perform their role as good women. Women are not considered as victims and, instead, are seen as those instigating the violence.
In FDFs, where men become victims of domestic violence, the patriarchal ideology that has been socialized for individuals through various social institutions still places men as the main class and women as the second class. In this type of family, when men become victims of domestic violence, they do not dare to escape the cycle of violence. Men prefer to stay in a marriage and tend to conceal the violence they experience. They do not want their wives’ acts of violence to be known by others, because it would threaten their masculinity and show weakness, and they would be embarrassed.
Masculinity requires men to be masculine. In Javanese and Muslim societies, in particular, a man is considered as the head of the family who must be obeyed and respected. Therefore, men must be capable of becoming good family leaders. When men become victims of domestic violence, it is extremely embarrassing for them, and they choose to remain silent about it. The violence experienced by men shows their inability to lead the family. It highlights their failure at being masculine. Therefore, the violence they experience must be kept a secret from society. For men, it is important to uphold their dignity in the face of society by sustaining their masculinity.
In addition, men often choose to stay in a marriage because they are ‘imprisoned’ by masculinity. Masculinity requires them to be good leaders in the family and to be able to manage and maintain the integrity of the family. Discourse in Javanese society also dictates that marriage must be maintained, no matter what. Divorce is considered a disgrace and ruins the reputation of the extended family. In Javanese society, marriage not only concerns two individuals but also two large families, so the decision to divorce is taken by the entire family.
In FDFs, women commit domestic violence because they feel insecure and are afraid of being left by their partners. Their husbands have higher education and better-paying jobs, so they try to confine their husbands, not letting them ‘out of their grasp’. Feelings of insecurity, fear of abandonment and fear of their husbands seeking other women have made these women adopt various measures to ‘control’ their men. These women want to be dominant to gain power in the family so that they can regulate the men. These men tend to ignore the violence they experience because they are also being distressed by the patriarchy which requires them to always win over women.
An AF is a family in which the roles of a man and woman fluctuate and are alternate. An AF is a new concept proposed from the results of this study. In this type of family, the relationship between husbands and wives is more equal. The dominant position shifts from one party to another, alternately. This type of family originates from families in which domestic violence is experienced by the wives. When experiencing violence, these women often fight back using counter-violence. This resistance from women victims of domestic violence is what ultimately causes the power relationship between husbands and wives to shift alternately.
Although Connell concludes that gender relations always exist in all types of institutions, she is more focused on gender actions and relations in civil institutions, including the family. The family is seen more accurately as a complex product of the society in which it exists. Thus, power represents an important structure in the family. Within the family maybe it is unnoticeable, but the influences in decision-making, male-dominated sexual practices and domestic violence are evident (Connell, 1987). Connell admits that there are contradictions in family institutions; a woman possesses more power than the man, for instance.
This study on dual-career families supports Connell’s assertion regarding the gender relations in the family. This study reveals how power in the family is strengthened and reinforced by violence. In FDFs, women commit violence against men in an effort to gain power in the family. The study further demonstrates how structural variations in families may occur. As mentioned earlier, the AFs are a result of women’s resistance against the domestic violence they had experienced. However, this resistance is their attempt to escape the cycle of violence. Women with intellectual and economic resources no longer want to be oppressed and they demand equality. Their resistance is an effort to fight gender inequality, and it has managed to shift the structure within the family. As a result, women and men have similar rights and equal positions in the family Therefore, women are no longer the objects of oppression.
Examining power relations and exposing domestic violence within dual-career families is not an easy task to investigate the social phenomena. Since the beginning, it has been recognized that this study requires seriousness, accuracy, foresight, patience and perseverance in obtaining the data from the fields. This study of power relations and violence in dual-career families finds modern terminology in the power relations of husbands and wives who experience domestic violence. There are three categories. First is the MDF, a family dominated by men, where men are the perpetrators of violence and women remain the victims. Second is the FDF, which is dominated by women, as the name implies. In this category of family, women are the perpetrators of violence and men become the victims. Women commit violence against men to gain power so that they can ‘control’ the men. The third comprises the AF, indicating that the roles of husband and wife shift and alternate. In this category of family, the dominant position alternates from men to women and vice versa.
This AF originates from continued domestic VAW which worsens over time. Violence in various types, including verbal/psychological, physical, economic and sexual, ultimately increases the consciousness of women that they are victims and, hence, fosters resistance. The AFs, which result from women’s resistance, can alter the structure of the family. It creates a new structure where there is no hierarchy of position between women and men. The changing role, where the family is not always dominated by husband or wife is able to create an equal and ideal family.
Footnotes
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the informants of this study. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.