Perpetrators of intimate partner violence: who are they and what can be done to stop them?

Question 1 

Perpetrators of intimate partner violence always try to maintain the emotional and psychological control of their victims. Most IVP controls their victims through manipulation, where the victims believe that the perpetrators are important to them or instill fear of more abuse if they report or leave. By emotionally and psychologically manipulating their victims, IVP perpetrators can maintain their victims despite the abuse. 

Through emotional and psychological manipulation, the victims believe that they are responsible for their partner's behavior, such as anger and violence. Therefore, the victims protect the perpetrators either because they fear to lose them or being subjected to more violence (Bray, 2019) . This fear often makes the victims remain in abusive relationships; this causes many individuals to blame the victims thinking that they entertain their perpetrators (Witte, Schroeder, & Lohr, 2006) . 

Question 2 

The concept of church separation with the state often emphasizes that the government has no right to coerce an individual to be part of a certain faith. It should also not try to impede any religious practices in public spaces. This idea of "separation of church and state" strengthens the idea that people have a legal right to freely exercise their faith and religious practices without government interference. Being free to perform any religious practice means that individuals can exercise their faith. 

As a Christian, I believe that individuals should have the chance to belong to a particular faith. The government should not be involved in determining or defining the faith and religious practices of an individual, whether in public or private, as long as the rights are not used to violate other people's freedom. Christians should, however, try to privatize their worship and avoid very public worship, which Jesus in Matthew 6: 5-6, termed as hypocritical. 

Question 3 

Symbolic interactionism is a sociological theory focusing on relationships among people in society. According to this theory, people make sense of their social worlds through communication. The feminist theory tries to explain how the gender system operates and the consideration of ethical issues, like whether gender positioning is fair. 

The proponents of the social interactionism emphasize on the social interaction between students in classrooms or playgrounds. Social interaction between students promotes gender-role socialization; teachers' expectations may influence the students' performance. Through this interaction, students can establish meaning and develop different views of the world. 

The proponents of the feminist theorists argue that schools act as agents of secondary socialization, which assists in enforcing patriarchy (Acker, 1987) . Despite th is view, they believe that education is the only tool that can reduce patriarchy by providing more opportunities to females in their quest to achieve equality. Schools can be used to alter socializations, change attitudes, and implement legislation that promotes gender equality (Acker, 1987) . 

Question 4 

Oligarchy is a power structure where a few individuals wield power to control a country. In an oligarchy, the small group has enough power to devise policies that favor them and, in oftentimes, exclude other members of the society (Oligarchy, 2020) . The oligarchs maintain power by having positive relationships among themselves. 

In my view, I think that the United States is turning into an oligarchy. Oligarchy is sometimes compatible with democracy since the oligarchs do not need to be in a political office to create influence. However, their wealth and abundant resources are enough to motivate and influence people in power. The USA's economic elites have a greater political influence than normal citizens (Winters & Page, 2009) . The elites have enough power to dominate policy implementations in certain areas. 

For example, the Koch brothers revealed that they put about $250 million into the USA's 2016 election. According to Jones & Gee (2018), they had also promised to provide about $400 million in 2018. Additionally, Bloomberg Michael used about $23 million to support the democrats in the 2016 election and plans to use more in upcoming elections. These huge investments in political parties and elections give the elites the capacity to influence leaders. 

References 

Acker, S. (1987). Feminist Theory and the Study of Gender and Education. International Review of Education, 33 (4), 419-435. 

Bray, B. (2019, June 24). Addressing intimate partner violence with clients. Counseling Today . Retrieved from https://ct.counseling.org/2019/06/addressing-intimate-partner-violence-with-clients/# 

Jones, N., & Gee, A. (2018, September 26). America's super rich: six things to know. The Guardian . Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2018/sep/26/america-oligarchy-dominated-billionaires-big-money-series 

Oligarchy. (2020, April 2). Encyclopedia Britannica . Retrieved from https://www.britannica.com/topic/oligarchy 

Winters, J. A., & Page, B. I. (2009). Oligarchy in the United States? Perspectives on Politics , 731-751. 

Witte, T. H., Schroeder, D., & Lohr, J. M. (2006). Blame for Intimate Partner Violence: An Attributional Analysis. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25 (6), 647-667. doi:10.1521/jscp.2006.25.6.647