Attitudinal support for violence against women: What a population‐level survey of the Australian community can and cannot tell us

Violence against women (VAW) is a serious and prevalent problem globally. Societal‐level norms, practices and structures are among the factors contributing to it, sometimes referred to collectively as representing “cultures of support” for VAW. Understanding factors contributing to these cultures is important for prevention, but remains the subject of debate. Population‐level surveys of attitudes toward VAW are one means to strengthen this understanding. Although there are a number of such surveys internationally, scholarly research based on secondary analysis of data, at least from surveys in high‐income countries, is scant. This article reports on new analyses of the Australian National Community Attitudes Towards Violence Against Women survey to explore its potential to further empirical and conceptual understanding of cultures of support for VAW. To facilitate this, a scale to measure attitudes toward VAW was developed post hoc from the survey (the Violence Supportive Attitudes, or VSA‐18, Scale). Subsequent analyses investigate the relationship between this scale and relevant demographic factors and a measure of attitudinal support for gender equality (GE). The GE measure, place of birth, employment and occupation, generation, education and sex contribute to variance in the VSA‐18 Scale. Findings are discussed in the context of theoretical debates and directions for future research.     

What Hindu Sati can teach us about the sociocultural and social psychological dynamics of suicide

By leveraging the case of Hindu sati, this paper elucidates the ways in which structure and culture condition suicidal behavior by way of social psychological and emotional dynamics. Conventionally, sati falls under Durkheim's discussion of altruistic suicides, or the self‐sacrifice of underindividuated or excessively integrated peoples like widows in traditional societies. In light of the fact that Durkheim's interpretation was based on uneven data, nineteenth century Eurocentric beliefs, and a theoretical framework that can no longer resist modification and elaboration, by reconsidering sati it is possible to sketch a new model that strengthens Durkheim's theory by making it more robust and generalizable. The following model is built on five principles. First, integration and regulation are not distinct causal forces, but overlapping contextual conditions. Second, to better explain the variation in suicidality across time and space, we must also pay attention to culture as it provides the underlying meanings of suicide that can increase the odds a person or class of persons become suicidal or are protected against suicidality. Third, structure still matters, but in many cases, the role power and power‐differentials play must be considered. Fourth, understanding why and how people choose suicide depends on incorporating identity and status processes. Fifth, because the expression of social emotions like shame are patterned by structural and cultural conditions, to understand how suicidality is socioculturally patterned we must further explore the link between identity/status, social emotions, and structure and culture.