Summary

A family’s violence history increases the rate of violence. Gilligan recounts the history of violence in his family by sharing a story. The story is of a family in which the father was violent towards the children. Gilligan states that the rancher only knew how to speak with his fists (Gilligan 3). The wife, “halfbreed’ was particularly fond of a son, whom the husband severely punished. After the beatings, the son would often disappear only to return after a long search. However, after one particular incident, he was found in a well, and it was later discovered that he had died before falling in it. A closer investigation revealed he ate a rat-poisoned pie, which was prepared by his mother. Several generations later, the same violence is replicated in Gilligan’s own family. The father, a successful surgeon, had beaten up his mother, who even left at one point (14). Although he never hit her again, Gilligan’s brothers were not spared. In fact, the brothers, much to the puzzlement of Gilligan, were slapped and thrashed by their ill-tempered father. Gilligan states that being born in a generation of violence creates victims and perpetrators, women often being the victims. It is often wondered why female victims chose to stay in these abusive unions, just like Gilligan’s mother (14). Judging from his family’s history, Gilligan is sure that at least every household has experienced violence and that there is a member of the family, like him, who speaks out against the violence. Gilligan claims that family violence is often generational, with men as the perpetrators, and is present in nearly every home.

Violence and punishment are the same. Gilligan argues that both violence and justice have the same motive of avenging (19). Those who commit violence do so in retribution for a wrong committed against them. Comparatively, the justice system punishes the wrongdoer, which in itself is an act of vengeance. Therefore, punishing criminals solely based on their conduct is the best course of action. The justice system is narrow and strictly focuses on what is morally right and wrong, and anyone, after being taught the difference, commits a crime, should be punished. Gilligan also states that political and ideological factors are substantially to blame for the current justice system in America (22). Stopping criminal violence is possible if people broadened their moral perspective.

Violence is a result of choice and can be prevented. Gillian states that any form of abuse is a tragedy to the victim and perpetrator (6). Some people are victims by accident, while in some cases, it is an act of God. Regardless of the cause, both victims and perpetrators are affected by the violence.  Gilligan holds that violence arises from the collective moral choice and illustrates using the story of Moby-Dick(23). From the story, he deduces that people have their beliefs of what is good or bad, and should be punished. Due to this collective moral choice, the USA has the highest number of incarcerated individuals in the western world. Worse still, the prisoners live in so abhorring conditions to the extent of attracting the attention of the Human Rights Watch (24). Henceforth, to prevent violence, it is imperative to do away with the moral approach to violence. People should not believe that understanding violence is a way of excusing it. In fact, interacting with criminals and gaining their perspective on why they were violent is the best way of curtailing violence. Violence is caused by moral choices and can be changed if society understood and spoke more about violence.

Assessment

I agree with Gilligan’s position of family violence. Gilligan offers accounts of violence in his own family, which started with his grandparents. After that, he recounts his father’s violent ways. Using his family’s illustration of domestic violence is convincing to the reader that domestic violence usually traces its origin from earlier generations. From his work, it is also evident that the victims of violence also end up being the perpetrators. The halfbreed poisoned the pie either to kill the father or her son (16). Both of them were subject to abuse from The Rancher and the wife eventually killed her child. Equally, Gilligan’s father was abusive. As a child, he may have been on the receiving end of the violence and continued the cycle with his family. The man also metes family violence in families. In all the illustrations by Gilligan, the perpetrator is male. Equally, males constitute a higher number of victims if Gilligan’s family is anything to go by. By demonstrating using his family, Gilligan is convincing when he alludes to the existence of violence in at least every homestead. Although he does not explicitly mention the impact that it has on the family members, other than shock, Gilligan denotes that it is possible for an entire generation to suffer from generations-old violence. Gilligan’s point on family violence sufficiently illustrates the cycle of domestic violence.

Violence is indeed a tragedy. Regardless of the type, all parties involved in violence suffer (6). I agree with Gilligan to this extent. Those who commit violence could be doing so out of anger or vengeance. Unless the victim is entirely innocent, former perpetrators usually understand why they are being punished. As victims of circumstances, victims and perpetrators do unto others what had been done unto them. The biggest tragedy regarding violence is the moral system that people have. Gilligan mentions that viewing violence from a moral perspective is the wrong way, especially since people can end violence if they wanted to (21). The society’s definition of what is good and bad limits how violence is managed. Apparently, knowing what is good or evil should be a straightforward case. The justice system, unfortunately, operates using this principle, ignoring other aspects of violence. If society does not change this opinion on violence, then tragedy will repeatedly strike at home and national levels. I concur that violence is a tragedy that is unfortunately furthered by society’s moral beliefs.

Violence and punishment are the same and require a change in tact if violence is to end. Gilligan argues that violence and retribution operate under the same principle, they should be considered equal (6). The argument is logical since both intend to punish and control behavior. Given their nature, it is unlikely that wrongdoers will ever learn their lesson nor will the violence end. Forthwith, society should be more open-minded towards crime, as Gilligan claims, so that better reforms are made. It is also true that if politics and ideological factors are disregarded, it will be possible to do away with violence ultimately. Policy changes and a study on the causes of violence are thus imperative to ending the vice. To end violence, it is vital to formulate techniques that aim to understand the behavior and not punish the crime, as stated by Gilligan.

Work Cited

Gilligan, James. Violence: Reflections on a National Epidemic. New York: Vintage Books, 1997.

Do you need high quality Custom Essay Writing Services?