This paper and the accompanying materials, all handed in at the last moment, without any prior advice from me, do not follow the guidelines for the term paper: the tables are scanned from other publications, and not done with Spss.
The first
function in SPSS to valid//again// the use
of my study was the interchange with the correlation function, where dozens
of variables from each topic narrowed into selective groups where the variables
of each topic were paired in order to reveal usable guidelines. Despite
the numerous combinations provided by my topics, only three sets were enough
to establish a thesis for a paper. The first and most important set included
V 693—the frequency of intercommunity—and V 979—husbands’ reasons for grounds
of divorce. Other sets also referred to for my research included V 782—acceptability
of violence—crossed with 1153—divorce causes—and V 773—internal violence—with
V 1153.
The collective
ideas of all the variables present useful guidelines in which to search
for incidents to prove the relation of violence and divorce within the
selected cultures. Comparing the variables as one group, I found that they
all measured single concept—the bond between divorce and violence. My goal
was to get the concepts in my hypothesis in line with the measures used
in the variables; successful in this case, evidence for replication prevailed
within the comparison of variables to the many societies. In the case of
V1153, it measures up with three variables relating to divorce, exhibiting
the reliability of the variables. Exercises and measurements in verifying
a link between variables and my hypothesis allowed me to continue on with
the direction of this paper.
The decision
to choose the relevant variables to incorporate into a paper depended on
an indicator called Pearson’s correlation. This measurement coordinated
the accuracy of the values, whereby a lower number in this column meant
a more accurate calculation. A standard was set for this Pearson correlation,
valid at the point less than 0.05. For the sake of discussion, the numbers
resulting from my findings were as follows: 0.410 with 0.037 Pearson correlation
for V693 & V 979, 0.276 with 0.024 Pearson correlation for V 782 &
V 1153, and 0.257 with 0.024 Pearson correlation for V 773 & V 1153.
Readily
the values mentioned in the previous paragraph also accounted for compatibility
of the topic in other cultures. Having the trend only valid in a few cultures
would mean that the trend is limited and conclusively should not be expected
on a multicultural scale. In recognizing the tendency of each result we
see that the relations show enough significance to be able to apply to
other cultures. Manipulating the Pearson correlation we measured the connections
of the variables systematically; lower correlations address a combination
not common in many societies, while significantly high correlations mean
the set variables are dependable in the sponsoring societies.
Another function
also used in consolidating this report was the crosstabulation. Cross tabs
compiled the attitudes and the actions of people and categorized them geographically—with
the aid of V 200. In addition to crosstabulation’s regional information,
a table from this function provided the number of valid cases as compared
to the total number of entries was coordinated by a processing summary.
While evaluating
the data, a majority of the trend existed in South America and Africa.
The focus in these two continents was not the result of preference in these
areas nor was it biased towards other cultures; instead the recurrence
of my results navigated me in these areas in order to explain the occurrence.
The validation of these areas came from the data sheet holding the responses
from 186 different cultures, using the variables under the topics of internal
violence & divorce—more specifically, the variables mention above.
The limited number of cultures involved here denied the distinction of
the trend of violence and divorce in specific parts, of the world, but
it helps in understanding how things are run in cultures augmenting violence
and divorce.
As far as
research goes, the functions provided leads on where to begin the trial
and error process on how to interpret violence and divorce in the applicable
societies. Diffusing the primary confusion on the topics required an ardent
search through cultures unlisted in the spreadsheet as well as the many
of the appointed cultures; I eagerly searched for many cultures displaying
a strait forward link between internal violence & divorce. Expectedly,
no such luck existed in the many instances, thereby leading to a multiple
step process: an in depth understanding of the culture, the incorporation
of variables into each culture, and a search to see if the hypothesis exists.
Assuming a simple link for something would appears for a intricate problem
like the one being address would demonstrate the shallowness of my views.
More appropriately this requires detailing of each culture so as to show
a clear approach to verifying my thesis.
The interaction
among these people follows the rules of survival. Since the actions inducing
pain does not continuously happen, the arguments are sought to be products
of tension among individuals, not entire societies. As stated in the Encyclopedia
of Societies, hostility rarely involved hordes of people with tragedies
of death, or spanned any big defeats in battle. However mild disputes may
be, divorce nonetheless upholds tension within any married couple, bringing
havoc to parents of the feuding couple as well. In some instances marriages
that end in broken vows potentially result from the wife’s failure to produce
children and the low productivity in her duties. Even the laziness in a
woman is greatly despised and gives legitimate grounds for scolding and
beating by a husband, the violent course of action. It is hard to say if
a man will ultimately divorce a wife for her laziness, yet this scenario
displays how violence interconnects with divorce.
An approach
to understanding the relationship between violence and divorce is possible
by tracing remnants of conflict and marriage, comparing some history of
each culture, and finding for clues showing definite connections or deviance.
Consolidating the divorce rates and any war habits & ritual between
citizen within any society followed by critical analysis of the people
would be viable in answering my problem. By enduring the discrepancies
of each culture and understanding the reappearing patterns and adjustments,
we can then deduce an explanation that is relevant in foreign societies
as well as our own.
Cotopaxi Quichu
The study
of the Cotopaxi Quichu provided more evidence of a society where violence
is minimal, and divorce happens infrequently as well. The geographical
area inhabited by this group stretches from the town of Pujili to the east,
Sigchos to the north, and Angamarca to the south. Their homelands exist
on an elevation at the 3400 to 4000 meter range, with ethnic boundaries
tied in with the limits of maize cultivation.
The economics
of these people are based on subsistence agriculture and a limited commercial
activity. Men and women of the area tend lands for producing barley, lava
beans, and potatoes, primarily for the consumption of the family. In Zumbagua,
families more contraband cane alcohol produced in the western lowlands
to the White towns for sales in order to raise capital. With these small
scale methods of income, the trading of the inhabitants occurred with the
other ecological zones, on the basis of a cash economy. Considering the
increasing poverty, less and less surplus is available, leading households
to maintain ties with other households who have access to resources of
higher or lower elevation. The relative tranquillity of their economy provides
little to no reason for feuding, thus on the basis of economics friendly
trading served to inhibit quarrels.
As for the
social structure of the people, the family is closely tied together with
much affection shared among the family members. Parents refrain from disciplining
young children, although older children may be chastised for failing to
do their responsibilities. You children are treated and dressed as anhydrogynous
beings, whereby the only distinction between gender is the boy’s haircuts
and the girls ear piercing. Productively, the Cotopaxi Quichu raise their
children in a passive but affectionate manner, and thereby constituting
a standard of people and of unity within the family and among other people.
There exists
no formal means of social control; no police station, no jail, and no judicial
system. A convict intended on being brought to justice was sanctioned either
by an execution ordered by the victim’s family or by transferring the perpetrator
to a provincial capital located several hours away. At times outsiders
will intervene when violence erupts within the family. In this case, negative
gossip would be the only censure. Like many face-to-face societies, gossip
is a strong force in controlling behavior and is, in fact, the most frequently
applied sanction to all cases.
Although
the teachings of values bound families together, equally strong are the
deep enmities that develop between families. Hostility began with gossip,
accumulating force that spread to families and neighbors. The problem then
either diffused into nothingness or progressed to public gatherings on
the street. If the latter persisted, then the most severe cases integrated
masses of people fighting in defense of their beliefs; severe cases pertained
to national politics or religion.
More noticeable in people’s lives are conflicts within the family. These fights between two family members occur from problems driven by the hardships of society. Drunken husbands, depressed for various reasons, have the tendency to diffuse the problem b beating on the wife. From incidents of battery and threats from a husband, women retaliate with physical force as well as by banding together with other women in the family to beat up the abusive husband—usually in cases where the residence is matrilocal. Analyzing this society, it is evident that they have some history of violence with divorce being absent. In the two cases presented so far, violence is a factor in the town where divorce may occur, but the reverse is not true. Alluding to my theory, violence is a good indicator of divorce, while the opposite is not true.
Conditions for divorce: Economic Aspect
One
case of divorce, evident in a majority of African societies, relates to
the socioeconomic status of the male. In establishing reasonable grounds,
the economic groups needed to be separated into high, middle, and low income
groups. To test this factor, the informant recovered the records of the
duration of a marriage involving men from each category along with the
frequencies of divorce in each group. Sure enough the middle and high status
males had 76% and 71% marriages 1 ending in divorce. Contrary to the ability
of a husband to support a women, men who can provide more financial support
for a partner, thus establishing stronger bonds with a wife, actually expressed
less tolerance for women, explaining accounts of higher divorce rates of
middle to high status husbands to low status husbands. An explanation for
the low status husband was that the dependence on the wife for financial
stability exceeds that of the well to do husbands; where in fact the husband
created stronger bonds with the wife due to a sharing of responsibility
to produce family income. Being able to support a wife solely on the husband’s
income may make her more attached to and dependent on the husband, yet
with the male owning all the power financial gain, he acquire other women
more easily, resulting in short bonds within the marriage and in easily
inspired divorces. Divorce thereby, in this case, succumbs to the potential
earning capacity of a husband.
Observing
each culture, we attempt to find arguable similarities as opposed to blatant
coincidences. With each of the selected cultures, we found substantial
evidence of violence and divorce in an array of societies. Judging all
the information of each society as valid, I neglected to consider similarities
among the different cultures as coincidental because of the many factors
explaining the purpose of violence and divorce in the particular culture.
By reviewing the many aspects of a culture—whether common or distinct—and
instating the selected variables into the reviews of the culture, one can
see develop test the reliability of the variables through their application
in each society.
Living in
an American society of rampant violence and divorce, I sometimes feel that
other societies go through the same general course of action apparent under
standards. On the other hand, an over-generalization of the trends existing
in our culture comparable with others is also a naive assumption. I believe
that the explanations for divorce and violence can not be so easily linked
together; for that reason, the bridging of the two topics are still open
to interpretation. Correspondence to the ideas presented here curtails
more accurate descriptions of other cultures on an individual basis; however,
these ideas propose general ideas which deem applicable to many societies,
to a point where the ideas serve as good references in anticipating problems
leading to divorce to a majority of other cultures around the world.