Gender and Violence in Islamic Societies

Patriarchy, Islamism and Politics in the Middle East and North Africa

Zahia Smail Salhi, Zahia Smail Salhi

• Publisher: I.B. Tauris
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9780857733689
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Sciences sociales
• Subtopic: Études relatives au genre

As a result of the uprisings that spread across the Middle East and North Africa in late 2010 and 2011, the issue of state public violence against both men and women dominated the headlines. But gender-based violence, in both its public and private forms, has for the most part remained unnoticed and is often ignored. The forms that this kind of violence can take are influenced by cultural norms and religious beliefs, as well as economic and political circumstances. In 'Gender and Violence in Islamic Societies', violence is perceived not only as physical harm, but includes various forms of violence directed at women because they are women. These include segregation in the workplace and limiting women's access to wealth, gender stereotyping in the media and education, verbal aggression and humiliation, control of women's finances and income, forced veiling, restricted access to education and health. Gender-based violence is thus analysed in its various forms and localities, encompassing both the public and private spheres: within the family, the general community, at work and in various state institutions.
Here, Zahia Smail Salhi brings together a wide range of examples of gender-based violence across the Middle East and North Africa, from discrimination in the workplace in Jordan to the physical abuse of underage domestic workers in Morocco, and from psychological and verbal violence against women in Tunisia and Algeria to the practice of female genital mutilation in Egypt. The evidence demonstrates that the violence, far from being of universal character across the region, is instead diverse, in both its intensity and in the processes of addressing such violence.

CHAPTER ONE

GENDER AND VIOLENCE IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA: NEGOTIATING WITH PATRIARCHAL STATES AND ISLAMISM

Zahia Smail Salhi

Violence against Women/Gender-Based Violence: Definitions

The word ‘violence’ covers a broad spectrum. It is defined as ‘any act carried out with the intention of, or perceived intention of, causing physical pain or injury to another person’ (Gelles 1986:27), the exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse (Merriam-Webster Dictionary), and the expression of physical force against one or more people, compelling action against one’s will on pain or being hurt (Oxford English Dictionary).

The American National Council limits its definition of violence to ‘behaviour by persons against persons that intentionally threatens, attempts, or actually inflicts physical harm’ (1996:9), and the World Health Organisation defines it as the ‘. . . intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, mal-development or deprivation’(WHO 2002:38). While both latter definitions exclude unintentional behaviour that may cause harm, Gelles’ definition includes acts that may be perceived by the victim as intentional.

El-Bushra and Piza Lopez add another dimension to the above definitions by defining violence as an assault on a person’s physical and mental integrity, and insisting on it being an underlying feature of all societies, and an undercurrent running through social interaction at many different levels (El-Bushra and Piza Lopez: 1993).

As to violence against women (VAW), it is often defined as acts of violence carried out against women, which often implies that such acts are carried out by the opposite gender i.e. men and often by intimate partners. It is the form of violence used to establish and enforce gender inequalities and keep gendered orders in place.

Although it is often assumed that gender-based violence is perpetrated by men against women, the United Nations Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women (1993) defines it as violence that is directed against women because they are women, or violence that affects women disproportionately, and noted that such violence could be perpetrated by assailants of both genders, family members and even the ‘State’ itself.

The United Nations General Assembly on the other hand defines violence against women as: ‘any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or mental harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life’ (1994:18). One thing the two definitions have in common is targeting the victims on the basis of their gender.

Many feminist theorists (Radford and Friedberg 2000) draw attention to the limitations of the term ‘violence against women’, which while it highlights the gendered nature of the violence, it fails to specify any connection with the abuse of children, and they emphasize the interconnectedness of woman and child abuse as a longstanding theme of feminists analysis.

Dobash and Dobash draw attention to the general disagreement among researchers in relation to definitions, methods and the resulting findings concerning both the direction and the impact of violence between women and men in intimate relationships (1992:258–84). Most importantly, we find their point on ‘what counts as violence and to whom’ (Dobash and Dobash 1998:4) extremely relevant to the present study as in many Muslim countries in general and in the MENA region in particular, certain forms of violence are not seen as being violent acts such as verbal abuse and intimidation especially by intimate partners and/or family members. It is a fact that verbal abuse in such cases is considered a legitimate and mild method of correcting women and children.

Some other forms of violence are ridiculed and remain shrouded in secrecy such as marital rape which is severely discredited by religious authorities and culturally immersed views as it is the duty of the wife to satisfy her husband’s sexual needs at all times.

Female genital mutilation and infibulations are also not seen as forms of violence against women in the countries where they are practiced, and to some extent even honour killings are not viewed as punishable violence since they are practiced for the reason of redeeming family’s or the clan’s honour. What would be considered as violence is in fact the control of such societies in the way they guarded their women and therefore their honour. Intervening in their ways of life and the ways they have organised it for centuries is often seen, especially in rural and tribal settings, as a severe interference and a threat to the structure of the clan, the village or the tribe.

Another important point raised by Dobash and Dobash, is that of the source of the definition of violence: ‘Do we use the perspectives of victims? Of those who perpetrate these acts? Of researchers? Of the law? Of policymakers? Should researchers attempt to develop distinct, abstract, and definitive conceptualisations of these acts?’ (1998:4).

These questions indicate that more work is needed in terms of clearer definitions both in defining what is and what is not violence, but also, the diversity of cultures across the globe results in the diversity of definitions of what is and what is not a form of violence against women.

The politics of naming and definition is indeed an important theme in feminist theorising, and while various terms have been used invariably to describe the problem, as among other things ‘violence against women’, ‘sexual violence’, ‘family violence’, ‘intimate partner violence’ and ‘gender-based violence. Some terms are more relevant than others depending on the focus of the undertaken research.

Gender-based violence reflects culturally-defined notions of masculinity and femininity which serve to reinforce women’s subordinate position. It embodies the power imbalances inherent in patriarchal societies and may take an endless spectrum of forms, such as rape, including marital rape, rape as a tool of repression against particular classes or groups and rape as a form of ethnic cleansing; domestic violence; child abuse; female foeticide and infanticide; denial of health care and nutrition for girl children; sexual and emotional harassment; genital mutilation; forced prostitution; pornography; population control; enforced sterilisation; war and state violence; exploitation of refugees; political violence including that directed at the families of political targets and reduction in state services leading to increased stress and workload for women (El-Bushra and Lopez 1993:1–9).

The EUROMED Gender Equality Programme defines gender-based violence as one of the most humiliating, degrading and harmful human rights abuses that extend over borders and cultures (2008–11).

Men and Women as Perpetrators of Gender-Based Violence

While the term ‘violence against women’ solely targets women as victims of violence directed to them as women, and ‘domestic violence’ relates to violence experienced in the domestic realm or the private sphere often from intimate partners, ‘gender-based violence’ is not limited to violence against women by intimate partners but extends to include violence against children in addition to violence against by male as well as female partners.

The Equal Justice Foundation (EJF) website offers a forum for men victims of domestic violence and presents the case as receiving very little interest compared to violence directed to women. The main tendency is that this type of domestic violence is less studied not only because men often do not report cases of violence by their male or female partners for reasons of male honour on the one hand and other considerations including absence of legislation and prevailing stereotypes on the other, but also because no one seems to promote research into violence against men or encourage men to report their experiences of violence.

It is a fact that research into women’s violence against men is very scarce, and that the subject of violence against women, despite the proliferating number of studies being currently conducted in the Northern hemisphere, remains a relatively new subject. It is also a fact that in the Southern hemisphere including the MENA region the subject of gender-based violence is very new and often not fully accepted as addressing a lived reality.

In their article ‘Women’s Violence to Men in Intimate Relationships: Working on a Puzzle’, Dobash and Dobash argue that intimate partner violence is symmetrical as women are as likely as men to perpetuate violence against an intimate partner, which goes to contradict the common view that it is overwhelmingly men who perpetrate violence against women partners, which they call asymmetry.

With the purpose of considering more carefully the nature of the violence that forms the claim of symmetry of violence between men and women, Dobash and Dobash (2004:324–49) examine in detail the nature, severity and consequences of violence perpetrated by women against male partners. In order to do so, they scrutinized and presented results of a study which included 95 couples in which men and women reported separately on violence in their relationship.

They conclude that women’s use of violence differs from men’s use of violence in nature, frequency, intention, intensity, injury and emotional impact. Furthermore, while men use violence as intimidating and coercive forms of controlling their partner’s behaviour women do not.

On the other hand, men testified that women’s violence was ‘inconsequential’ and did not affect their wellbeing and safety, which resulted in them rarely reporting it or seeking protection unlike women who tend to over-report their own violence (ibid).

This notion of symmetry in violence could only be observed in the realm of domestic violence or between what Dobash and Dobash designate as intimate partnerships and should be referred to as either domestic violence or family violence.

Gender-based violence occurs in both the private and the public spheres and is perpetrated by intimate partners, family members such as fathers and brothers in patriarchal structures and male strangers.

In the context of the MENA region, embedded stereotypes of gender-based violence often put forward men as sole perpetrators and women and children as sole victims. It is almost impossible to find portrayals of men being abused by women or other men in intimate relationships in the MENA region such cases do exist. This area remains a secret topic and a taboo subject mainly due to deep-rooted patriarchal structures which position men as symbols of power; victimising the male figure would be a serious offence and threat to patriarchy.

Most research findings, however, suggest that heterosexual intimate violence is gendered, with abuse, power and control wielded by men over their female partners, and that when women use violence, it is typically in self-defence or for non-aggressive reasons.

In their study ‘Women’s Use of Force: Voices of Women Arrested for Domestic Violence’, Susan L. Miller and Michelle L. Meloy (2006: 89–115) posit that ‘A single act of violence committed by a woman can eclipse a history of abuse and victimisation by a male partner’ (2006:108). They observed 95 cases of women on court-mandated Female Offender Programmes. Out of the total of 95 women, only 5 used behaviours which could be deemed ‘aggressive violence’, while 90 used violent behaviours and not systematic ‘battering’ or aimed at establishing power and control over their partners as is usually the case in men’s violence.

Miller and Meloy indicate that the behaviours which led to arrest were for the most part either ‘frustration response’ or ‘self-defence’. Most of the women in question were trying either to get away from a partner during a violent incident or to leave to avoid further violence, especially where they sensed that their children were or could be in danger of violence.

It is a fact that women’s motivations to commit violent acts tend to be more closely related to expression of feelings of anger and response to a partner’s abuse which we may also call self-defence and retaliation, than to the desire for coercive control of their partners, although some argue that both men and women use violence in equal measure for coercive control (Hamby 2009), and others posit that men and women may define and use control differently; women may use violence to gain autonomy in the relationship while men may use it to demonstrate authority (Kernsmith 2005).

In order for us to understand the reasons why researchers arrived at such conflicting findings, we need to better understand the meaning of violence as well as define what counts as violence and what does not. To do so, we need to focus on concept formation, definitions, forms of measurement and the context in which violence takes place. Furthermore, to avoid generalisations and oversimplifying matters, we have to consider the complexity of women’s motivations for using violent behaviours, which is in most cases a result of the inconsistency in forms and intensity of such violent acts.

Many internal and external factors contribute to this inconsistency and these revolve around cultural and economical factors, as well as individual factors which may include personality traits in terms of overt and covert reactions to violence and childhood experiences in terms of exposure to violence (Swan and Snow 2006). One factor we should always take into account when dealing with such violence is its gendered nature.

Miller and Meloy insist that an over-reliance on the criminal justice system to protect women from domestic assaults fails to address the gendered nature of the violence: ‘This failure can be attributed to the movement away from a critique of the underlying social, legal and political structures that underpin male privilege and use of violence, towards a more individual focus on the pathologies of offenders and victims’ (2006:108).

In her book Victims as Offenders: The Paradox of women’s violence in relationships (2005) Miller further argues that Legal policies must recognize that women commonly use intimate partner violence in response to their partners’ abuse, and contends that mandatory arrest policies fail to recognize that many such women are also victims, thus inappropriately subjecting a proportion of women to court-mandated batterer’s programs, which in most cases are modelled on male’s perpetrations of violence and are not adapted to meet the needs of women who are not regular batterers, but often resort to overt aggression as a one off reaction to long term stifled anger and frustration.

Gender-Based Violence as a Continuum

In her ground breaking study Surviving Sexual Violence (1988) Liz Kelly puts forward the concept of ‘a continuum of sexual violence’. In her analytical framework, she posits that the entire spectrum of violence is correlated and interlinked and that no particular manifestation of violence falls into a single category.

Rather than focusing on the different forms of violence and abuse as separate issues, the continuum recognizes commonalities between them in women’s experiences and theoretically as forms of violence reinforcing the power and control of patriarchy.

Developed to facilitate theorization of these commonalities and connections, Kelly’s continuum of violence is constituted through difference: the different forms of sexual violence, their different impacts, and the different community and legal responses to women, positioned differently, within and among cultures and through history (Radford and Friedberg 2000:2)

Kelly explains her approach in the following terms:

First: a basic common character that underlies many different events; and second, a continuous series of elements or events that pass into one another and which cannot be readily distinguished.

The first meaning enables us to discuss sexual violence in a generic sense. The basic common character underlying the many different forms of violence is the abuse, intimidation, coercion, intrusion, threat and force men use to control women.

The second meaning enables us to document and name the range of abuse, intimidation, coercion, intrusion, threat and force whilst acknowledging that there are no clearly defined and discrete analytic categories into which men’s behaviour can be placed (Kelly 1988:76).

The ‘continuum of sexual violence’ illustrates the hollowness of the frequent criticism that radical feminism, in focusing solely on commonalities in women’s experiences, offers universalistic explanations.

By including both a global dimension and experiences of women and children often excluded from research agendas – black women and girls and women involved in prostitution, for example – Kelly’s continuum further demonstrates that this criticism lacks foundation. She contends that although women’s awareness of the threat and reality of sexual violence is now, perhaps more than ever before, publicly acknowledged, this fact continues to be almost wholly ignored.

Kelly’s study which is based on in-depth interviews with 60 women is perhaps the first to cover the experience of a range of forms of sexual violence over women’s lifetimes. Drawing on feminist theory, developing a critique of male research and quoting extensively from the women interviewed, it develops feminist thought in several key areas: the similarities and differences between forms of sexual violence; the ways women define their experiences; and the strategies women use in resisting, coping with and surviving sexual violence.

Kelly stresses the importance for all women of recognizing the incidents of sexual violence in their lives and seeing themselves and other women as survivors rather than mere victims. In highlighting the ways in which the...

Table of contents

• Cover
• About the Author
• Title page
• Copyright page
• Contents
• Notes on Contributors
• Introduction
• Chapter One Gender and Violence in the Middle East and North Africa: Negotiating with Patriarchal States and Islamism
• Chapter Two Gender-based Violence in the Middle East and North Africa: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon
• Chapter Three Women and Violence in Light of an Islamic Normative Ethical Theory
• Chapter Four The Struggle against Male Violence with an Egalitarian Jurisprudence and Religious Conservative Government: The Case of Secular Turkey
• Chapter Five Working in a Hostile Environment: Female Labour Segregation and Women?s Impediments to Private Sector Opportunities in Jordan
• Chapter Six Violence against Underage Girl Domestic Workers in Morocco
• Chapter Seven Gender and Violence in Egypt: Prevalence and Factors Exposing Women to the Risk of Domestic Violence in Alexandria
• Chapter Eight Female Genital Mutilation between Culture and Religion: The Case of Egypt
• Chapter Nine The Insidious Violence: A Study of Husband-Wife Power Relations in the Algerian Context
• Chapter Ten Gender use of Expletives and Verbal Abuse: A Tunisian Case
• Chapter Eleven Gender and Language Discrimination in EFL Textbooks: Female Invisibility as a Form of Gender-based Violence
• List of Tables and Figures
• Bibliography