on anger
| By FEM - Apr 17th, 2006 at 10:17 pm EDT |
In "Cultural Lessons in Aggression" (Chapter 1 from Men, Women, and Aggression), British psychologist and criminologist Anne Campbell contrasts how aggression is conceptualized by men and women. Campbell argues that control is vital in how both sexes think about aggression. However, the power/aggression relationship is fundamentally different for men and women. For women, aggression is the "failure of self-control" whereas for men it is the "imposing of control over others". Campbell uses testimonials from men and women as well as critiques of other theorists (e.g. Sigmund Freud and James Tedeschi) to present her argument.
After studying the rare instances of women committing violent crimes, Campbell became interested in why so many women avoid fighting. Through talking to a young mother (Nora) and a businessman (Mike), Campbell realizes that women feel frustrated by their anger whereas men become excited. When a woman becomes aggressive, she feels defeated by her inability to control her anger. Therefore, Campbell argues that women view aggression similarly to expressive theorists who maintain "aggression is the first step on the slippery slope to selfishness and chaos". When a man becomes aggressive, he gains the social rewards of altering the behavior of those who angered him and gaining a powerful reputation. Campbell posits that the ideas and behavior of men thus fit instrumental theories of aggression as men use aggression to achieve or reclaim control. Because men feel rewarded for aggression whereas women feel punished, men are more likely to become violent. To explain why men and women treat aggression differently, Campbell argues that the sexes have opposing "social representations" of everyday events. When faced with hostile actions, women feel stressed while men feel challenged. These emotions shape behavior and are reinforced by the socialization of children, the media, politics, and everyday social interaction.
While Campbell's findings are well-documented. I cannot escape that fact that they do not apply to me. I am not ashamed of my anger. If anything, I am ashamed of my sadness. Ironically, I feel more "masculine" (dare I say empowered?) when angered. Perhaps this is a function of an inner drive that although feminist is paradoxically ashamed of feminiminty as it has been so depreciated by society.
Perhaps, I am just an exception. And although I recognize that one anomaly does not break "the rule", I wonder if there are more. I also ask whether her findings are specific to a certain gender and/or age group. Maybe more women of my age share the same situation as me.
After studying the rare instances of women committing violent crimes, Campbell became interested in why so many women avoid fighting. Through talking to a young mother (Nora) and a businessman (Mike), Campbell realizes that women feel frustrated by their anger whereas men become excited. When a woman becomes aggressive, she feels defeated by her inability to control her anger. Therefore, Campbell argues that women view aggression similarly to expressive theorists who maintain "aggression is the first step on the slippery slope to selfishness and chaos". When a man becomes aggressive, he gains the social rewards of altering the behavior of those who angered him and gaining a powerful reputation. Campbell posits that the ideas and behavior of men thus fit instrumental theories of aggression as men use aggression to achieve or reclaim control. Because men feel rewarded for aggression whereas women feel punished, men are more likely to become violent. To explain why men and women treat aggression differently, Campbell argues that the sexes have opposing "social representations" of everyday events. When faced with hostile actions, women feel stressed while men feel challenged. These emotions shape behavior and are reinforced by the socialization of children, the media, politics, and everyday social interaction.
While Campbell's findings are well-documented. I cannot escape that fact that they do not apply to me. I am not ashamed of my anger. If anything, I am ashamed of my sadness. Ironically, I feel more "masculine" (dare I say empowered?) when angered. Perhaps this is a function of an inner drive that although feminist is paradoxically ashamed of feminiminty as it has been so depreciated by society.
Perhaps, I am just an exception. And although I recognize that one anomaly does not break "the rule", I wonder if there are more. I also ask whether her findings are specific to a certain gender and/or age group. Maybe more women of my age share the same situation as me.
!
Comments are closed for this post.
Michelle Stover/MS
In all seriousness, though, aggression varies hugely from individual to individual, and from culture to culture as well. So hugely, in fact, that while there may be some statistical biases for each gender, I think it's overemphasizing for theorists to point and say "Men do it this way, women do it that way". The difference between, say, the average Texas man and the average Japanese man in terms of acting out aggression is, I'd wager, far greater than between an average Texan man and a Texan woman.
You seem to have come to roughly the same conclusion.