Violence Against Women: a universal phenomenon

by Noema Chaplin

Half of humankind lives under the threat of violence, regardless of income, age, class, race, culture or ethnicity. Violence causes untold misery, harms families across generations and impoverishes communities...

It stops women from fulfilling their potential, restricts economic growth and undermines development. Efforts should be made to reach a consensus and set universal standards of behaviour through the elaboration of human rights in order to protect human life and dignity in our fast changing world

Violence is an extremely diffuse and complex phenomenon with biological, psychological, social and environmental roots, defined by the World Health Organization 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, maldevelopment, or deprivation."

The human cost is grief and pain, which, of course, can’t be calculated. The impact of violence: lives lost and health harmed. Many victims are too weak, scared or young to protect themselves. Much violence occurs out of sight, in homes, workplaces and even in medical and social institutions. Many acts of violence are never recorded because they do not come to the attention of authorities. Pretty often women became homeless or impoverished as the result of violence. It’s against human security and dignity.

A wide range of public health researchers in the United States and around the world have set themselves the task of understanding violence and finding ways to prevent it. Many different sectors and agencies should be involved in prevention activities and evaluation should be an integral part of all programs. Agencies should:

- Create, implement and monitor a national action plan for violence prevention;
- Enhance capacity for collecting data of violence;
- Increase collaboration and exchange of information on prevention, etc.

It is time to take these efforts to the next level. Members States can do more to implement the legal and policy frameworks to which they have committed themselves. All of us must form strong and effective partnerships with civil society, which has such a crucial role to play on this issue at every level. Together, we must work to create an environment where violence against
women is not tolerated. Let all of us -- men and women alike -- join forces in this mission.

Noema Chaplin
Board Member CCC/UN (Coordination Communication Committee)
Member of the Planning Committee of 57th, 58th, 59th DPI/NGO conference, New York
e-mail: noemachaplin[at]yahoo.com

No one has the right to defend their “honour” by murder

by Dr. Aisha Gill
Chair of Newham Asian Women’s Project and Secretary of Imkaan

Banaz Mahmod, an Iraqi Kurd from the Kurdistan region, was garrotted with a shoelace before her body was stuffed in a suitcase and buried in a back garden...

The prosecution in Court 10 of the Old Bailey argued that the killing was ordered by Ms. Mahmod’s uncle, Ari Agha, at a family meeting, and that the killing was endorsed by her father Mahmod Mahmod. A fellow Kurd, Mohamad Hama, 30, earlier pleaded guilty to assisting with the murder.

Prosecuting for the Crown, Victor Temple QC told the court in his summing up that Banaz was murdered because she had fallen in love with a man whom her family did not want her to marry. Temple QC reminded the jury of a mobile phone video recording that was screened at the Old Bailey Criminal Court, in which Banaz Mahmod gave evidence from ‘beyond the grave’ as she was filmed on a hospital trolley by her boyfriend. In the recording, Banaz Mahmod said that she was “really scared” of her father after she broke her arranged marriage. Less than a month before her untimely death, the 20-year-old warned police that her family was plotting to murder her. Also two days before she was killed the family staged a failed attempt to kidnap her boyfriend Rahmat Suleimani. Temple QC also told the jury that if a man or woman in such a community has a relationship outside the confines of marriage they have to hide it. Families who disapprove will go to violent extremes to end the relationship. In chilling closing remarks he commented:

“If one brother wanted another brother to help he may choose the most violent means…in these communities honour is everything which means that brother will kill brother, uncle will kill uncle and father will kill daughter.”

This case has raised once again the complex issues surrounding the phenomenon of “honour” killings. Recent cases have made it clear that in various minority communities across the UK, people are increasingly committing murder in the name of preserving family honour. Culture and religion are often used as justifications for discrimination against women. Cultural reasons are used to maintain honour codes of conduct that deny the advance of women’s rights. Women who experience such violence, particularly South Asian/Iraqi Kurdish women, often live in communities where they are treated as repositories of community and family honour, and subsequently their bodies and sexuality are the sites of vengeance and gender-motivated violence. This woman was murdered for exercising her right to choose her own boyfriend.

What needs to be done?

The case of Banaz has several implications for the awareness of, prevention of, and intervention in cases of honour-based violence. First, there is a need to believe the testimony of a victim who reports that she has received threats of an honour killing by their families. This requires understanding how women understand their experiences, how they respond to violence, where they go for help, what happens when they ask for help, and the effectiveness of that help. There is a need to invest in prevention programmes and to expand financial, legal and support services for women fleeing crimes related to honour.

In the meantime, to deter recurrent patterns of this abuse, punitive responses must be made to those who perpetrate violence; those who conspire to commit murder must be pursued and punished with unrelenting certainty and severity. The criminal justice system must also provide robust and effective responses in the form of promptly responding to calls by vulnerable victims who may be subject to threats to their life so that we do not have another tragic case like that of Banaz. There also needs to be a massive injection of sustained long-term educational campaigns to highlight the various manifestations of honour-based violence. At the community level, there is a need for community participation in efforts to prevent violence, such as efforts to change social norms regarding violence. However, these efforts will need to be complemented by addressing the wider structural inequalities that contribute to the production of violence against women.

Dr. Aisha Gill
Chair of Newham Asian Women’s Project and Secretary of Imkaan
Email: a.gill@roehampton.ac.uk

Other Links
The Times Police ‘failed’ victim of honour killing
Read Aisha's Letter in The Times
FCO Guidelines on Forced Marriage
SOAS and CIMEL research on 'Honour' Crimes
Women's Hour report online
Combatting 'Honour' Based Violence Forum

The Missing Link

Posted by Jennifer Drew
Researcher in Male Sexual Violence Against Women

Consider how the following sentences all focus on women and girls and omit naming the perpetrators. X number of women and girls were raped last year. How many teenage girls have been in abusive relationships? How many women have experienced domestic violence within the last year? Here are the same sentences again but with a slight difference. Males raped X number of women and girls last year. How many boys have sexually abused their girlfriends? How many men have sexually/physically abused their female partners within the last year?

The difference is the first group of sentences depict women and girls as passive victims. The second group names the gender responsible for acts of sexual and physical violence against women and girls.

One of the most pernicious aspects of male violence against women and girls is its continued invisibility. The phrase ‘violence against women’ or ‘domestic violence’ tells us nothing apart from the fact women experience violence. But just who are committing these acts? Can it be other women? Or perhaps women are abusing themselves. The media too collaborates in taking a gender neutral stance wherein it is always ‘people’ or ‘youths’ who have committed violence. Of course those taboo words ‘male or men’ must on no account be used, as attention will then focus rightly on to the perpetrators’ actions and not the victims.

But there is no such taboo against the words ‘women or girls.’ Naming the female gender is central whenever the media reports such acts of violence. As in ‘a woman committed violence’ or ‘a teenage girl hit someone.’ Victim blaming is very popular for a number of reasons, but the primary one is to remove attention from men’s and boys’ accountability. It also reinforces the message that (male) violence against women is solely a female issue and effectively makes invisible males’ central role in violence against women and girls.

Challenging male violence against women and girls is vital but unless the gender of the perpetrators is always named, nothing will change. Refusing to name the gender primarily responsible for (male) violence against women, means we are inadvertently colluding in hiding and excusing male accountability. Of course not all men and boys commit violent acts against women and girls, but the fact remains many do. How boys and men are socialised into what is perceived as ‘natural’ masculinities must be constantly challenged.

Links:

http://www.truthaboutrape.co.uk/
http://www.mencanstoprape.org/
http://www.whiteribboncampaign.co.uk/
http://www.xyonline.net/ - Men, Masculinities & Gender Politics
http://www.swapcampaign.co.uk/
http://scottishwomenagainstpornography.co.uk/ (Note site is currently being reconstructed)