Factors increasing the risk of violence against women Introduction In connection with the issue of violence against women, it is necessary to deal with the causes of violent behaviour. These are, for example, conflicts in relationships, stress, alcoholism, and gender inequality, which is a key cause in the violence perpetrated by men against women in heterosexual partner relationships. The listed factors, however, still do not tell us about the actual causes or background of violence against women. The question remains: why do some people, under the pressure of problems, everyday conflicts, and differing opinions, become aggressive while others do not? Why are they predominantly men? Do biological or genetic factors play a role here? What significance do psychological, social, and societal influences have here? Factors increasing the risk of violence Through the study of the specialist literature, the results of research, and comparison with our own practice, we have noted that the answers to these questions have over the last decade been different and even contradictory. We are of the opinion that in the current period the only thing that is certain is that each of us is capable of being violent. It depends only on whether and under what conditions violence occurs. According to Professor Mátel (2011), the so-called single-factor theories, which disproportionately emphasize exclusively one cause of the emergence of violence, are currently being abandoned. Like him, we prefer the view of several factors influencing domestic violence. The World Health Organization published an overview of the various factors increasing the risk of violence against women (Table 1). Table 1 Factors increasing the risk of violence against women Table 1: Factors increasing the risk of violence against women (Krug et al. 2002 – taken from MÁTEL, A., SCHAVEL, M. et al. 2011. Aplikovaná sociálna patológia v sociálnej práci. Bratislava : VŠ ZaSP sv. Alžbety, 2011. pp. 234-235. The following theories will provide us with various perspectives on the issue of the emergence of violence in a violent relationship. The family system reacts to broad socio-structural conditions that produce stress. Violence as a reaction to stress occurs especially if aggressive socialization is present in the case history and if mechanisms of social support are lacking. Violence – physical forms of violence can be legitimized as a way of coping with stress (2011b). Power theorists view violence as a product of the system of social relations. In asymmetrical partner relationships there is a higher incidence of stress and conflicts, which increases the probability of abuse. The members of a social group attempt to live their lives according to their needs. These necessarily differ in the case of each of the members (2011c). The origin of physical forms of violence can be located in the social structure and the complex system of values, customs, and superstitions concerning gender inequality. The victims of violence are most often women and the perpetrators men, and the structures of society support this inequality. Physical forms of violence against women are a reflection of the structures of sexual and economic inequality in society; they are generally accepted, tolerated. They have become part of the role that society ascribes to men in their personal sphere. "The abuse of women is regarded as a demonstration of male strength, as the result of social relations in which women are kept in a position subordinate to men, in which they bear responsibility towards them and are dependent on their protection. According to these theories, the social, political, and economic dependence of women on men provides scope for the perpetration of physical violence against women by men" (1999b). Men–abusers abuse their partners because society allows them to. This theoretical construction stems from two theories: from the psychodynamic theory and from the theory of social learning. It connects the experience of the abuse, of the mistreatment of a man in childhood, with the subsequent abuse of a woman in adulthood. The situation in which abuse occurs has the following phases (1999c): In the phase of loss – the partner feels frustration arising from the inability of the partner to verbalize. He has a lack of skills essential for solving problems – the ability of self-assertion. The abuser feels himself to be powerless. These feelings trigger anger and a desire for the re-establishment of control and power. The feeling of powerlessness provokes an explosion of anger, fury, and the use of threats and force. The phase of explosion helps the abuser to obtain the desired effect – dominance, which is the third phase of the syndrome. In the phase of gaining forgiveness and favour, feelings of guilt and fear that he will lose the partner's affection appear in the abuser, and this significantly influences his behaviour. It is successful especially in the beginnings of a partner relationship. This concept is not generally applicable to all cases of violence. The search for the real background and causes of violence against women is very complex. Quarrels, sharp discussions, and differing opinions occasionally occur in every partnership. What all must happen for these common conflicts to grow into brutal acts? What influences ordinary quarrels to become uncontrollable and thus to escalate in this way? Spouses or partners often quarrel over the upbringing of children, the running of the household, the division of duties, or over other family members, and so on. For A. Buskotte (2008) it is interesting that violent behaviour in men in the family appears predominantly in those cases where the position of the spouses in the family is rather asymmetrical. This means that the wife has stayed at home and takes care of the children and the household, while the husband goes to work and provides for the whole family. That would, however, mean that "power and the desire for power" really plays a substantial role here. In any case, A. Buskotte (2008) points out that some men allow themselves to be aggressive towards their partner precisely because they are completely certain of their stronger position, but some therapeutic observations point to the very opposite, see Table 2. Table 2 Impulses to domestic violence from the research of A. Buskotte (2008, p. 61) Alongside common everyday conflicts, the cause of the beginning of violence in a relationship may also be a turning point, an event, e.g.: the pregnancy of one's partner, the birth of a child, the announcement of divorce or separation, failures at work, unemployment, and so on. The Institute for Labour and Family Research carried out representative research focused on the experience of women with violence in Slovakia during the course of 2008. From the conclusions of the research it follows that "in first place among the agents or reasons for a partner's violent behaviour was his jealousy. It was indicated by almost 58% of women who have experience with the repeated occurrence of some of the violent acts from a current or former partner. In second place, with a total share close to 54%, were the personality characteristics of the partner, such as a violent nature, egoism, domineeringness, and the like. More than half of the votes of 87 relevant women and third place in the ranking was gained by the alcoholism or drunkenness of the partner (the overall evaluation approached 51%). This was followed by a quartet of causes that remained just below the 50% limit – they were indicated by more than 40% of relevant women, but it was less than a half. Among them were traditional views on the role of women and men in the family, which reached 49.8%; further, the opinion about the influence of bad upbringing in childhood with 43.1%; the conviction about the partner's low self-confidence as a reason for violent behaviour with 42.3%; and, to complete the quartet, it was a feeling of a certain superiority in the partner – 41.2% of women considered it a cause of violent behaviour" (Bodnárová et al., 2008). Given the significance and frequency of some of the risk factors of violent behaviour, we will deal with them more closely in the following subchapters. The aggressor's jealousy as a factor increasing the risk of violence against women We understand jealousy as a peculiar form of anxiety, arising from fears of the loss of the love of a partner who might transfer their feelings to another person. It is an emotional state, a state of affective tension, which intensely agitates and disquiets. The risk of the behaviour of a jealous person is often the loss of control over oneself and the inability to control oneself, with which is connected the possibility of causing bodily harm to the victim (Matějková, 2009). We distinguish the following types of jealousy:

  • situational jealousy - this concerns an unmanaged jealous reaction to a specific impulse. This may in individual cases have varying intensity and severity. For someone the reason for jealousy is the coquetry of a partner, for another a two-hour sitting with a colleague over coffee, a dance with a stranger, and the like. If this type of jealousy has no impulse, in time it disappears by itself, or does not even arise (2009b).
  • constitutional jealousy - this concerns an innate disposition to jealousy, usually manifested already during childhood, when a child is jealous of a sibling and peers. A hereditary component is also present here, which is discernible from the fact that similar behaviour tends to be usual in the family of the jealous person.
  • jealous obsession - people afflicted in this way are subject to delusions and controlling thoughts. The jealous person is constantly preoccupied with their fears and cannot be dissuaded from their mistaken convictions. This is also called pathological jealousy. Such a person is uncritical and reacts disproportionately to any impulse. The danger of this type of jealousy is also that such a person behaves normally in all other spheres of life, with the exception of jealousy. A layperson would not ordinarily look for a mental illness in them, which pathological jealousy is (2009c).

The manifestations of jealousy manifest themselves in each person in a different way. Not only biological factors and temperament are decisive, but also various other circumstances, above all the behaviour of the beloved person and the justification of the jealous person. We encounter jealousy in both sexes, in all social strata, and at every age. Jealousy is heightened by such traits and factors as:

  • feelings of inferiority and a lack of self-confidence,
  • the desire to possess and control the partner and to have them under control,
  • feelings of inferiority and a lack of self-confidence,
  • relations of rivalry,
  • temperament,
  • a bad choice of partner (if a man, for the sake of prestige, takes as his wife a highly attractive woman who has success with men),
  • envy,
  • alcoholism (which heightens jealousy).

The jealousy of adult persons belongs to the strong human affects that very intensely seize the entire personality of a person. A jealous person loses control over themselves and is not able to control themselves. It even happens that psychologically labile persons, in their jealousy, commit even criminal acts. Jealousy provokes marital breakdowns, human tragedies, hatred and envy, and even murders and suicides. A jealous person is uncritical, cannot be convinced by anything that their rights have not been violated, that the person in question has not committed infidelity and has not behaved in a way that would give reason for jealousy. Jealousy in adulthood arises between spouses and lovers. It acts very unfavourably on a person's self-confidence, sows a feeling of distrust in their values, causes the loss of self-assurance, and lowers self-confidence. At the same time it provokes in the jealous person an effort to gain the possibility of controlling the person who is the object of jealousy, and to know everything about them (2001b). The inferiority complex weighs intensely on the jealous person, who tries to overcome it by displaying their advantages, good social qualities, and merits. Often, however, they choose an utterly reprehensible way: they humiliate, underestimate, insult, and unjustly evaluate the object of jealousy, while, on the contrary, they exalt themselves, and even boast of non-existent qualities. Small manifestations of jealousy occur as a rule in every person. This is natural jealousy, which, after mutual explanation and the strengthening of mutual trust, may even bring partners closer and strengthen their mutual relationship. Natural jealousy often resolves itself. If partners really love each other, if they have a sincere effort to live together, the attacked partner explains and justifies their conduct, which gave the impulse for jealousy, and strives to behave in such a way that the jealous person can convince themselves that their jealousy is unfounded. If the jealousy is justified, mutual relations develop according to what plans the unfaithful partner has and how the deceived partner bears the infidelity. Either the partners turn to a court to dissolve their broken marriage, or they adjust their cohabitation. From our practice it follows that pathological jealousy has a permanent character, is very difficult to influence by treatment, and after release from treatment usually appears again. Morbid jealousy is usually manifested by groundless suspicion of the infidelity of a partner, by aggressive behaviour towards them, all the more dangerous in that the pathologically jealous person does not control it, is capable of acting rashly, without deliberation (2011c). Alcohol as a factor influencing the behaviour of the aggressor We also directed our attention to the role of alcohol in violence against women. In current conceptions it is attributed the role of a catalyst or trigger, but not of the cause of violent conduct. According to some authors, persons who need and want to vent their aggressive disposition deliberately get drunk, because a state of drunkenness may later serve to reduce their responsibility for the violence committed. Views on the topic of the relationship between alcohol and domestic violence differ. Research studies in Germany and Switzerland state that under the influence of alcohol up to 50% of men have a much greater tendency to violence (Buskotte, 2008). Bodnárová et al. (2008) states that 51% of the women questioned consider alcohol to be a cause of the violent behaviour of men towards women. From these data it is therefore evident that alcohol is not the sole reason and background of violent behaviour, but we are of the opinion that alcohol supports, heightens, and intensifies violence. Professor Mátel (2009) carried out research in which he also focused on the characteristics of the perpetrator that influence violent conduct. Figure 1 expresses the identified characteristics influencing the violence of the aggressor. In the research he "distinguished eight categories – characteristics that negatively influenced the behaviour of a member of the household towards aggression. Two characteristics considerably exceeded the others in their occurrence. They were alcoholism 34.6% and unemployment 17.3%. Of the other addictions and socio-pathological phenomena, gambling 3.8%, drug addiction 2.2%, and criminality 3.8% were identified. The share of partners undergoing psychiatric treatment made up a group of 3%, and a jealousy motive was indicated by 2.2%. In one case the perpetrator was a husband who was a professional soldier" (Mátel, 2009, pp. 162-163). Fig. 1 Characteristics influencing the violence of the aggressor Source: Mátel, A. 2009: Páchatelia domáceho násilia. In: Prevence úrazú, otrav a násilí. On – line časopis, 2/2009, roč. 10, s. 169, EISSN 1804-7858. Economic activity and its influence on violence against women The consequences of the economic transformation of society were manifested on the Slovak family quite negatively. Many families found themselves on the brink of destitution as a result of the rise in unemployment, the increase in the cost of living, and other negative phenomena that accompany the political and economic transformation of society. Taking into account the importance of the significance of work in our society, it is more than probable that unemployment to a very great extent influences the behaviour of the unemployed citizen. Above all, this is not merely a decline in the standard of living, which is caused by a decline in income, but also a serious intrusion into social relations and values. On the most general level, we can speak of the following consequences of unemployment on a person:

  • tension in the family and in family relations,
  • the disruption of the structure of the daily regime,
  • the loss of self-esteem and the loss of status in society,
  • social isolation, which arises from the limitation of social contacts,
  • the loss of values and of respect for public authorities.

Unemployment has a great impact on the family and family relations not only from the point of view of financial difficulties, but to a great extent they are the main cause of the disruption of relations between its individual members. In many cases it can also be a trigger of domestic violence. A person, through the loss of employment, in many cases falls into social isolation. Just as unemployment can provoke in an individual chronic disorganization of their life, mental depression, criminal offences, above-average drinking of alcohol or the use of drugs, domestic violence, it can provoke in society socio-pathological processes in the form of a crisis of values, a decline of respect for authorities, the disintegration of civil society, a crisis of the family, criminality. The negative consequences of unemployment do not influence only family and social relations, but are also manifested in the mental and physical health of a person. The common denominator of the relationship between physical health and unemployment is stress. The negative impact of unemployment on the mental health of a person means a higher average level of tension of negative feelings and a lower level of happiness and life satisfaction (Mareš, 2002). It is generally known that a person who has lost employment sooner or later falls into a state and feelings of uselessness, superfluousness, anxiety, loses self-confidence and self-esteem, and becomes more neurotic. Unemployment can mean a heavy psychological burden for the affected person. With longer duration it leads to mental and psychosomatic illnesses, as well as to permanent changes in social life. From the research of Professor Mátel (2009), in which he focused also on the characteristics of the perpetrator, it is evident that the unemployment of the aggressor is the second characteristic that influences violent conduct, immediately after alcohol. Bodnárová et al. (2008) carried out representative research on the occurrence and the experience of women with violence perpetrated against women. From the research it follows that "economically inactive aggressors made up just under 16%; of the economically active, the most numerous were manual workers with 38%, followed by specialist secondary-school-educated workers with 18% and managerial and self-employed workers with 17%" (Bodnárová et al., 2008, p. 26). In a pronounced violent relationship, manual workers had the highest representation with more than 48%, and then economically inactive partners with 34.5%, managerial or self-employed workers here reached a share above 10%, and specialist and creative workers accounted for 3.4% each (2008a). Although within pronounced violent relationships all kinds of economic activity are represented among the partners, manual workers (skilled and unskilled labourers) and economically inactive partners (men outside the labour market) occurred here more frequently. Manual workers exceeded the average by approximately 10% and the economically inactive even by more than 18%. (2008b) Bodnárová et al. (2008, p. 29) found through research that "with these economic statuses the occurrence of violent behaviour has a tendency to increase. More than a third of the partners perpetrating pronounced violence against their partner were men without economic activity. These were especially old-age pensioners (almost 14% of all cases of pronounced violence), and then unemployed men and disability pensioners (both categories at 10.3% each). Among violent relationships there also occurred partners who were students (2.7%). An increased occurrence of violent behaviour was recorded by men of higher age, lower education, and excluded from the labour market or with a lower work status." As is evident from the aforementioned research, unemployment, exclusion from the labour market, and a lower work status can mean for the affected couple an impulse, a trigger, or even the main cause of violence against women. The stereotype of the difference between men and women The most recent theories oriented towards violence against women consider the main causes to be the abuse of power on the part of the man, as well as the historically and socially conditioned imbalance between men and women. Masculine upbringing, the imposition of manly models, and the manifestation of the demonstration of male strength cause some men to need to prove, reinforce, and strengthen their power. Violence against women is considered the result of social relations in which women have a subordinate position towards men. In society, violence is still tolerated; historically, a social, political, and economic gender inequality and the dependence of women on men has been created, along with religious and cultural traditions that directly or indirectly determine for men the right to regard a woman and children as their property and to decide about them. Fixed gender stereotypes are an important factor in the emergence and persistence of the imbalance of power between women and men in society. They thus become the main cause of the perpetration and toleration of violence against women, which is a serious violation of human rights. Gender stereotypes, which understand the woman as "naturally" weaker, more labile, more emotional, and the man as stronger, more decisive, more rational, influence children from birth. The fact that these stereotypical notions are incorporated also into textbooks and the contents of upbringing and education legitimizes them in a certain way. Experts see the causes in the social structure and the overall system of values, traditions, customs, but also myths concerning gender or other inequality. Conclusion From our practice it follows that the currently rising aggression in society is penetrating the awareness of the ordinary population. The most endangered groups of violence in the family are women and children. Violence against women is a considerably widespread and at the same time the least controlled form of violence. We can achieve an increased sensitivity of our society towards this phenomenon by acquainting the broad public with the specific issue of the aforementioned violence. Violence against women should not be a private matter that concerns only the victims and the aggressors, but it should be a problem of the whole society. Author: kpt. PhDr. Ľudmila Húsková, PhD. The author works as a specialist officer of the prevention group, District Directorate of the Police Force in Martin References BEDNÁŘOVÁ, Z.: Specifika práce s oběťmi domácího násilí in Policista 1/2006, Ministerstvo vnitra České republiky. BUSKOTTE, A. 2008. Z pekla ven. Žena v domácom násilí. 1. vyd. Brno: Computer Press, 2008. 176 s. ISBN 978-80-251-1786-6. MAREŠ, P. 2002. Nezaměstnanost jako sociální problém. 1. vyd. Praha: Sociologické nakladatelství, 2002. 151 s. ISBN 80-901424-9-4. MÁTEL, A. 2009. Deti ako nepriame obete násilia voči ženám. In Sme blog, Petit Press, 2008 MÁTEL, A., SCHAVEL, M. a kol. 2011. Aplikovaná sociálna patológia v sociálnej práci. Bratislava : VŠ ZaSP sv. Alžbety, 2011. 442 s. ISBN 978-80-8132-009-5. MATĚJKOVÁ, E. 2009. Řešíme partnerské problémy. Praha: Grada Publishing, 2009. 144 s. ISBN 978-80-247-2338-9