[Wamvan] 'Should we call it 'honour killing'? No!' (Montreal Gazette)

[Natalie Hill]

This is a link to one of the other very popular columns on this topic
(which I believe you are referencing, Lindsay).  It was actually published
way back in July, 2010, which I did not notice until just now.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/gerald-caplan/honour-killings-in-canada-even-worse-than-we-believe/article1650228/

Interesting to see the Gazette column is by Yasmin Jiwani - she is a very
prominent scholar in the areas of media, race, Islamophobia, xenophobia,
and the like.  I enjoy seeing anti-racist feminist academics translate
their work into columns for mainstream consumption.

Also interesting to hear your critique, Lindsay.  Would you mind
elaborating?

On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Lindsay Miles <lindskmiles at gmail.com>wrote:

> "The reality we as a society must face is that these murders are about
> gendered violence." - yes, but they are also about racism. they are about
> colonialism and imperialism. these murders speak to how women of colour and
> indigenous women ar...e marked as "violable" and how men of colour and
> indigenous men internalize racist, colonial logics. i appreciate how
> several articles including this one have touched on the Western-centric
> bias and anti-Islam sentiment in media coverage on "honour killings"
> however intersectional analyses are lacking.
>
> link to article and comments:
>
> http://www.montrealgazette.com/opinion/Should+call+honour+killing/6074266/story.html
>
>   Should we call it ‘honour killing’? No!
>
>  It’s a false distancing of ourselves from a too-common crime: the
> murder of females
>
> By Yasmin Jiwani and Homa HoodfarJanuary 30, 2012
>
>
>
>  Rona Shafia, left and Sahar Shafia, in a photo recovered from Sahar's
> cellphone, taken June 26, 2009 while the Shafia family was in Niagara Falls.
> *Photograph by: *From Archive
>
> The extensive media coverage of the Shafia trial and convictions raises
> important questions about how violence against women is framed in the
> media. Just as a photograph is framed by the photographer, so is the
> media’s framing of a particular issue; the focus of our attention is on
> what is in the picture only. Out of sight is the background we will never
> know. In the case of the Shafia murders, the media frame the story as an
> honour killing.
>
> Some authorities argue that the notion of honour is key to defining this
> type of crime involving family members. Typically, the victims are women
> pegged as having deviated from the moral code and thus undermined the
> family’s honour; by killing them, family reputation and honour may be
> restored. Premeditation is put forth as a core component to differentiate
> honour killings from other types of murders, such as crimes of convenience
> or crimes of passion.
>
> But recent studies indicate that premeditation is as much a component in
> other cases of domestic violence and murder as it is in “honour killings.”
> So what separates “honour killings” from other murders of intimate partners
> or family members? More important, what is to be gained by framing the
> murders of the Shafia women and girls as honour killings rather than simply
> defining them as acts of femicide (the murder of women and girls solely on
> the basis of their gender)?
>
> Calling the murders “honour killings” accomplishes two goals. First, it
> makes it seem as if femicide is a highly unusual event. Second, it makes it
> seem as if femicide is confined to specific populations within Canada and
> specific national cultures or religions in the world at large. But Canadian
> statistics prove otherwise. According to StatsCan figures, from 2000 to
> 2009 an average of 58 women a year were killed in this country as a result
> of spousal violence. In that same period, 67 children and young people aged
> 12 to 17 were murdered by family members. In contrast, recent estimates
> tell us that there have been 12 or 13 so-called honour killings in Canada
> in the last decade. It does not take a genius to see that comparing 12 or
> 13 against the hundreds of women and children who were victims of familial
> violence serves only to frame “honour killing” as peculiar, when in reality
> it is part of a larger pattern of violence against women.
>
> There is also, critically, the issue of affixing familial femicides to
> particular cultures. But if “honour killing” is truly reflective of
> particular cultural groups, what kind of cultural frame should we apply to
> the widespread murders of aboriginal women? Aboriginal women’s
> organizations have documented more than 500 cases of women murdered or
> missing (and by now we know that “missing” probably means murdered).
> Amnesty International has corroborated these figures, and the United
> Nations has requested an inquiry. The arrest and conviction of Robert
> Pickton, a serial killer who preyed on aboriginal women, suggests that many
> of these missing and murdered women were killed not by aboriginal men but
> by white men. A cultural frame typically affixes blame on the perpetrator’s
> cultural affiliation. The media, in this, and similar cases, did not.
>
> Going back to the coverage of the Shafia murders, many reporters
> referenced the family’s Afghan cultural background and adherence to Islam,
> suggesting that the murders were motivated by cultural and religious
> beliefs. According to the 2006 census, there are 48,090 Canadians with
> Afghan ancestry. Yet the media have unearthed only this one high-profile
> case of multiple familial homicides. If the phenomenon of “honour killing”
> is reflective of cultural practices or religious traditions, why is the
> number of incidents not higher?
>
> The reality we as a society must face is that these murders are about
> gendered violence. They symbolize a wider, more prevalent logic that shows
> women and girls what is likely to happen to them if they don’t behave and
> conform to social and patriarchal expectations. Recall the Guy Turcotte
> case, where a father killed his own children after their mother began a
> relationship with a mutual friend. It is a notion that women are property:
> if they do not conform, they are likely to suffer the consequences.
>
> Femicide is about gender. It is about women and girls being killed because
> they are women and girls. That is the particularity of this kind of
> violence. It has nothing to do with honour, passion or convenience. These
> are merely excuses and rationalizations.
>
> Yasmin Jiwaniis an associate professor in the Department of Communication
> Studies at Concordia University.Homa Hoodfaris a professor in Concordia’s
> Department of Sociology and Anthropology.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wamvan mailing list
> Wamvan at lists.resist.ca
> https://lists.resist.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/wamvan
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.resist.ca/pipermail/wamvan/attachments/20120131/024f28d3/attachment-0001.html>