Characteristics of violence against children in a Brazilian Capital

The purpose of this exploratory, descriptive and retrospective study with a quantitative approach was to characterize violence against children in Curitiba. Reports of 2004 through 2008 about compulsory denouncements of violence cases were analyzed. The results showed an increase in violence, with home violence as the most frequent type and five to nine-year-olds as the most affected group, and negligence and physical violence as the most denounced forms of violence. Almost 81% of the sexual violence is performed against girls and the father is the main aggressor, showing inequality in gender relations and between generations. The importance of notification as a visibility instrument is highlighted. Other confrontation measures are necessary though, such as the promotion of equitable relationships of gender and generation, and cross-sectional policies that involve the social segments in a praxis that transforms reality.

Temporal factors in violence related injuries--An 11 year trend analysis of violence-related injuries from a Swiss Emergency Department

Injury from interpersonal violence is a major social and medical problem in the industrialized world. Little is known about the trends in prevalence and injury pattern or about the demographic characteristics of the patients involved.

Is There a Culture of Violence in Colombia?

During the past decade, economic factors have been given a prominent role in explaining political violence. The example of Colombia shows that economic factors can explain the ubiquitous nature of violence in that country only in the context of a socio-culturally rooted propensity to use violence. The study draws on relevant published research to identify evidence of a culture of violence in Colombia and discusses the structural conditions that allow or cause such a culture to arise. It is shown that violence in Colombia cannot be explained without taking into account cultural factors that are in turn dependent on other explanatory factors, including economic ones.

Understanding the Other’s “Understanding” of Violence: Legitimacy, Recognition, and the Challenge of Dealing with the Past in Divided Societies

Post-conflict societies which have achieved a cessation of violence and embarked on a political conflict transformation process cannot in the long-term avoid a process of dealing with the past. Case studies of South Africa and Northern Ireland confirm this normative claim, showing that within the post-war society as a whole a social consensus on how to “understand” and “recognize” the use of violence that occurred during the conflict is necessary: understanding the other’s “understanding” of violence. A mutual understanding must be reached that both sides fought a campaign that was just and legitimate from their own perspective. The morality of the “other’s violence” has to be recognized.

The Uses of Violence: An Examination of some Cross-Cutting Issues

A general theory of violence may only be possible in the sense of a meta-theoretical framework, As such it should comprise a parsimonious set of general mechanisms that operate across various manifestations of violence. In order to identify such mechanisms, a general theory of violence needs to equally consider all manifestations of violence, in all societies, and at all times. Departing from this assumption this paper argues that three theoretical approaches may be combined in a non-contradictory way to understand violence as goal-directed instrumental behaviour: a theory of the judgment and decision-making processes operating in the situations that give rise to violence; a theory of the evolutionary processes that have resulted in universal cognitive and emotional mechanisms associated with violence; and a theory of the way in which social institutions structure violence by selectively enhancing its effectiveness for some purposes (i.e legitimate use of force) and controlling other types of violence (i.e crime). To illustrate the potential use of such a perspective the paper then examines some general mechanisms that may explain many different types of violence. In particular, it examines how the mechanisms of moralistic aggression (Trivers) and moral disengagement (Bandura) may account for many different types of violence.

Micro and Macro Causes of Violence

The dominant emotion in violence-threatening situations is confrontational tension/fear (ct/f), which causes most violence to abort, or to be carried out inaccurately and incompetently. For violence to be successful, there must be a pathway around the barrier of ct/f. These pathways include: attacking the weak; audience-oriented staged and controlled fair fights; confrontation-avoiding remote violence; confrontation-avoiding by deception; confrontation-avoiding by absorption in technique. Successfully violent persons, on both sides of the law, are those who have developed these skilled interactional techniques. Since successful violence involves dominating the emotional attention space, only a small proportion of persons can belong to the elite which does most of each type of violence. Macro-violence, including victory and defeat in war, and in struggles of paramilitaries and social movements, is shaped by both material resources and social/emotional resources for maintaining violent organizations and forcing their opponents into organizational breakdown. Social and emotional destruction generally precedes physical destruction.