The Nordic Paradox in violence against women

Psychiatrist Prof. Nevzat Tarhan noted that some men may appear educated, have successful careers, and seem accomplished from the outside yet still commit violence against their spouses. He stated, “This situation should not be evaluated solely as male violence but more generally as the strong oppressing the weak.”

Pointing to what is known as the “Nordic paradox,” Prof. Tarhan explained, “This concept refers to the fact that in countries like the Nordic nations, which are considered global leaders in gender equality, violence against women still occurs at high rates. These countries made significant progress in gender equality through legal reforms beginning especially in the 1960s. However, even today, two to three women per month lose their lives in Sweden due to partner violence.”

Prof. Tarhan emphasized that this shows violence against women cannot be explained solely by gender equality. According to studies conducted in European Union countries, the rate at which women experience at least one incident of partner violence in their lifetime is about 22 percent in Europe on average, 28 percent in Nordic countries, and around 33 percent in Türkiye.

Prof. Nevzat Tarhan, President of Üsküdar University and a psychiatrist, evaluated the issue of increasing violence against women and women’s psychology on the occasion of November 25, International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women.

Women and men are not biologically equal

Prof. Tarhan stated that understanding the biological and psychological differences between men and women is essential for grasping this issue correctly. “First of all, women and men are not biologically equal. However, socially, they must be equal in terms of rights and opportunities. It is important to make this distinction clearly. The claim of biological equality is not scientifically realistic. A woman’s body contains an average of 4 liters of blood, while in men this is approximately 6 liters. This difference alone shows that there is no equality in terms of physical strength and performance. Therefore, the concept of equality can lead to false expectations here. Brain functions also differ between women and men. Compared to men, the female brain is stronger in terms of empathy capacity. This difference can be observed even in childhood. When a child falls in kindergarten, boys tend to continue playing while girls show a tendency to help. This is an important example showing that empathetic inclination is innate,” he said.

The brains of women and men differ in problem-solving styles

Prof. Tarhan continued, “The brains of women and men also work differently in terms of problem-solving styles. When under stress, men tend to withdraw and seek a solution on their own, whereas women feel the need to relax by sharing and talking.” He added: “This situation sometimes leads to misunderstandings. Men may remain silent because they are trying to resolve the issue internally. Women, on the other hand, may be perceived as talking too much because they try to solve problems through communication. Yet this is simply the result of different stress management styles. If individuals are mature and sensitive to each other’s approaches, balance can be established between these differences. The left hemisphere of the brain is associated more with logic, reasoning, analysis, calculation, and speech, while the right hemisphere is associated with emotions, intuition, art, and aesthetics. The left brain carries more masculine qualities, while the right brain carries more feminine qualities. The prefrontal cortex provides balance between these two hemispheres. If a person cannot establish this balance, they may remain overly rational or overly emotional. Therefore, for healthy decision-making, the frontal region of the brain must function properly.”

There are also clear differences between men and women in terms of sexuality

Noting that biological differences are not limited to the brain, Prof. Tarhan said: “There are also clear differences between men and women in terms of emotional tendencies and sexuality. The male brain functions more erotically, while the female brain is more romance oriented. This difference also shows itself, for example, in short term relationships. After a relationship, a man can continue his life without forming an emotional bond, whereas a woman, even if she knows there is no expectation, may still expect an emotional response, may wait for a phone call. This situation is also supported by research findings.”

The women’s liberation movement turned into a male female struggle

Explaining that patriarchy, in other words patriarchal culture, dominated human history for a long time, Prof. Tarhan said: “In the 1960s, especially after the Second World War, the women’s liberation movement rose worldwide. At the beginning of this movement, very important gains were achieved toward eliminating inequalities between men and women. However, after a while the movement lost its direction in certain areas and turned into a male female struggle. This negatively affected the institution of marriage and the social structure globally.”

Women should not be a ‘sad princess’ but a ‘wise woman’

Recalling a statement by a feminist activist writer that “A woman’s comfort lies in having a loyal spouse and her own bank account”, Prof. Tarhan said: “A woman should have both economic independence and a spouse she can trust. Social roles have also been shaped based on biological and environmental foundations. However, in the 20th and 21st centuries, social conditions have changed greatly. These old roles have now lost their function. Today we are dealing with a new social reality. In this new era, women should exist not only through their femininity but also through their personality. Women should not be a ‘sad princess’ but a ‘wise woman’. When a woman realizes her own strength in this way, male female relationships can operate in a healthier manner.”

We must build a new social understanding

Pointing out that the patriarchal definitions of “manhood”, “womanhood”, “motherhood”, “fatherhood”, and “spouse” roles must now be rewritten according to the truths of this new era, Prof. Tarhan said: “We must build a new tradition and a new social understanding. Old patterns such as ‘This is how I saw it from my father’ or ‘When I strike once, I make her obey’, which legitimize violence and male dominance, must lose their validity. Likewise, sayings such as ‘A girl who is not beaten will beat your knee’ reflect sexist and violence oriented cultural codes. The belief, still common in society, that ‘a man does not obey a woman but a woman must obey a man’ is also wrong. Obedience applies to both sides, and loyalty applies to both sides.”

Where there is no trust, marriage breaks at its weakest point

Prof. Tarhan noted that while marriage used to be described as a “home of love”, the more accurate definition today is a “home of trust”, and continued: “Because where there is no trust, marriage breaks at its weakest point. Since the female brain is stronger in empathy, the tendency toward self sacrifice is also higher. This makes her the one who puts in more emotional effort in relationships. Typically, after having children, the woman focuses on the child and the man focuses on work. This weakens the emotional bond between them. Marriage is like fire: if you come too close, it burns you; if you stay too far, it extinguishes. Therefore, the distance must be kept in balance and the relationship must be continuously nurtured. Couples should focus not on ‘ego battles’ but on discovering ways to become ‘we’. The healthiest form of relationship is ‘being able to become we while remaining myself’. True attachment is only possible when individuals build a shared life without losing their individuality. This way, the relationship does not turn into a master slave model.” Prof. Tarhan also stated that leaving child rearing solely to the mother is problematic, emphasizing that in child development both mother and father must share equal responsibility. He pointed out that whether women work or not, they are typically expected to handle housework and childcare as well, which increases their burden.

It is not male violence, it is the powerful crushing the weak…

Noting that some men may be educated, have careers, and appear successful from the outside yet still commit violence against their spouses, Prof. Tarhan stated: “This situation should not be evaluated solely as ‘male violence’ but more generally as ‘the powerful crushing the weak’. Because these individuals are usually raised with an egocentric approach during childhood, with the idea that they should ‘stand on their own feet’. Although this upbringing is given with good intentions, it reinforces the belief that ‘everything should go the way I want’. This is an important factor that increases the tendency toward violence in marriage. Violent behavior is often reduced to issues such as alcohol use or anger management problems. However, the real root lies in personality structure. In individuals prone to violence, narcissistic or antisocial personality traits are particularly prominent. These individuals identify themselves as ‘good, right, flawless’, and they perceive criticism as a direct attack. A simple ‘no’ or objection from their partner threatens their ego. In such a case, the relationship shifts away from an equal partnership and turns into a ‘master slave’ dynamic.”

What lies at the root of violence?

Explaining that some people use anger as a problem-solving method or even as a means of gaining status, Prof. Tarhan continued: “These individuals see crushing the weak as legitimate because they perceive themselves as strong. This is almost a ‘law of the jungle’ mentality. In the jungle, the strong one wins, the lion is the king. A person who acts with this mindset at home imposes their power. When a woman tries to respond in such an environment, by shouting back or throwing objects, she becomes the injured party because she is not physically equal. In the law of the jungle, the weak are destined to be crushed. Therefore, responding to violence with the same method can place the woman in an even weaker position. For this reason, the root of violence lies not only in individual pathologies, but also in learned behaviors, cultural codes, and incorrect parenting styles.”

What does the ‘Nordic paradox’ describe?

Drawing attention to the phenomenon called the “Nordic paradox”, Prof. Tarhan said: “This term refers to the fact that in countries like the Scandinavian nations, which are global leaders in gender equality, violence against women is still seen at high rates. These countries made major progress by implementing legal reforms on gender equality especially from the 1960s onward. However, in Sweden today, 2 to 3 women still lose their lives each month due to partner violence. In Türkiye, this number is around 30 to 40 murders per month. Yet twenty years ago, this figure was 1 to 2 women per month. According to 2023 statistics, femicides in Türkiye have increased about tenfold. When we look at the population ratio, considering Sweden’s population of 10 million and Türkiye’s population of approximately 80 million, the numbers are actually similar. This shows that violence against women cannot be explained solely by gender equality.” Prof. Tarhan also noted that according to studies conducted in European Union countries, the rate of women who experience at least one instance of partner violence in their lifetime is around 22 percent on average in Europe, 28 percent in Scandinavian countries, and approximately 33 percent in Türkiye.

If a man has physical strength, a woman's strength is her thinking and strategic ability

Stating that if a man has physical strength, a woman's strongest tool is her ability to think and strategize, Prof. Tarhan said: “However, this strategy should not take the form of crying or emotional manipulation. Because when a woman cries, a man who is prone to violence may become even more inclined to crush this vulnerability. Therefore, instead of crying, a strategic and intellectual approach should be preferred. In such a situation, a woman should say: ‘You are very angry right now. I am not seeing your true self at this moment. I am noting your behavior, but I will not respond to you now, because what you are doing is not right.’ This approach activates the other person’s thinking brain. In other words, one needs to act strategically. It is important to recognize and effectively use one’s strengths. If the man feels that his anger affects the other person and that he is controlling them, he will continue using that power. For this reason, a woman should observe carefully which aspects influence her spouse.” Emphasizing that lack of empathy is the biggest enemy of relationships today, Prof. Tarhan said that when conflict emerges in a marriage, both parties can meet in the middle if each takes one step back.

Violence should never be internalized as a problem solving method, a way to seek justice, or a form of communication

Prof. Tarhan noted that when examining victims of violence, most are found to have witnessed or been subjected to violence during childhood, and said: “In the families where these individuals grow up, violence is internalized as a method of problem solving, seeking justice, or even communication. Therefore, violence feels normal and familiar to them. Girls who grow up under these conditions tend to be pulled in two different directions. Those with a strong sense of autonomy may avoid marriage, pursue education, and want a profession to protect themselves. Families also encourage them by saying things like: ‘Have a profession, have your own means. If you make a bad marriage, you can stand on your own feet.’”

Regret is also common in relationships that involve violence

Stating that violence may turn into a state of learned helplessness, Prof. Tarhan said: “The person accepts violence as fate, interpreting it as helplessness or even a form of affection. However, this is a sign of deep weakness and vulnerability. To overcome this learned helplessness, individuals need to have a developed sense of autonomy. Young women, especially early in marriage, express sensitivity to these issues and say they will never tolerate violence. Regret is also frequently seen in violent relationships. Especially in violent incidents that occur under the influence of alcohol, the person may feel intense remorse when sober. However, this remorse often has no healing effect because once violence becomes a method, the relationship cannot continue in a healthy way.”

Boundaries must be clearly established at the very first moment of violence

Prof. Tarhan said that tolerating or forgiving violence may happen once, but after that it becomes unacceptable: “Because at this point, adopting the victim role means creating conditions that enable further violence. For this reason, a marriage intent contract made at the beginning of the marriage or a marital maturity scale evaluated by the couple is important for discussing such matters openly beforehand. If someone sees violence as a method of solving problems in marriage, this person is not mature enough for marriage. A person like that should not be married, or if married, boundaries must be clearly drawn at the very first moment of violence.” Emphasizing that healthy marriages are only possible when mutual respect and personal boundaries are preserved, Prof. Tarhan said:
“In superficial relationships, this balance cannot be achieved because the bond quickly loses its substance. However, in deep and high-quality relationships, long-term bonds can be established.”

The greatest investment in a marriage is the time partners dedicate to each other

Prof. Tarhan stated that the most important need in marriages is spending quality time together and added: “If there is a meaningful relationship, trust forms and people do not magnify small problems. Issues are resolved naturally. The greatest investment is the time partners dedicate to each other.” Explaining that when men and women simultaneously take on the same roles it leads to “role confusion,” Prof. Tarhan said: “At home both the woman and the man should establish shared leadership by balancing their roles. A woman’s biological tendency is oriented toward self-expression. A man’s tendency is more reactive to visual stimuli. By considering these differences, a balanced system should be established in marriage.”

Approaches that destroy feminine and masculine identity are dangerous

Prof. Tarhan said that increasing trends of gender equality and gender neutrality in recent years damage the structure of marriage and identity and added: “Gender equality should be in rights and opportunities. Approaches that erase feminine and masculine identity are dangerous. This is a societal gamble. Genderless movements reduce marriage to sexuality alone, which weakens marriage as an institution.”

Concluding his remarks, Prof. Tarhan emphasized that social order must define the roles of men and women as complementary, not conflicting: “The roles of men and women should be based on complementarity, not conflict. The balance of feminine and masculine energy is vital for both individual and societal well-being.”