By Ibn Warraq
Phyllis Chesler pioneered the study of violence against
women in the late 1960s, concentrating on women living in North America and
Europe. By 2003, she was writing about honor killings, based on newspaper
accounts, Internet sources, interviews, and memoirs. She then embarked on a
series of equally pioneering, meticulously researched, academic studies of
honor killings in the West, but also in the Middle East and South Asia. These
studies and over 90 articles on the same subject are collected for the first
time in A Family Conspiracy: Honor Killing.
Chesler carefully distinguishes honor killings from “plain
and psychopathic homicides, serial killings, crimes of passion, revenge
killings, and domestic violence.” An honor killing is the murder of girls and
women by their families because of supposedly disgraceful acts perceived to
have brought public shame. Honor killings are a family collaboration and even
considered by their perpetrators to be legally justifiable acts of
self-defense, because the murdered girls’ dishonor is regarded as an aggressive
act against their families. It demands a response.
In her second of four in-depth studies first published in
The Middle East Quarterly, Chesler looked at 172 incidents and 230
honor-killing victims. She gathered most of her information from
English-language media around the world. “There were 100 victims murdered for
honor in the West, including 33 in North America and 67 in Europe,” Chesler
found. “There were 130 additional victims in the Muslim world. Most of the
perpetrators were Muslims, as were their victims, and most of the victims were
women.” Indeed, while Sikhs and Hindus do commit such murders, the honor
killings in her study, both those in the West and in the rest of the world, are
mainly Muslim-on-Muslim crimes.
It is a measure of her intellectual integrity that Chesler
goes where the data lead. Thus, her conclusion, based on the empirical
evidence, is that “the origin of honor killings probably resides in
shame-and-honor tribalism, not necessarily in a particular religion.” And she
holds each religion—Islam, Hinduism, and Sikhism—responsible for failing to
abolish, or trying to abolish, honor killing or femicide.
But can Islam itself really have nothing to do with honor
killings, even though Muslims have perpetuated the majority of such murders in
the West? Yes, honor killings have also been found in various societies in the
Balkans, the southern Mediterranean (Sicily, for example), and in India, but
could these cultures not have learned from Islam, since they were all under
Islamic domination for centuries? Further, how does one disentangle the
supposed tribal components of honor killing from the religious ones?
Surely, for example, Pakistani culture, saturated with
Islam—a religion that undoubtedly treats women as inferior—could only develop a
deeply misogynistic society that makes honor killing possible. Religious
authorities do not condemn honor killings in Pakistan, a fact that makes hope
of abolition remote. The attitudes that make honor-killing possible are derived
directly from Islamic teachings and are further reinforced by them. Muslim
nations make similar arguments about cliterectomy and other anti-modern
practices.
Chesler has put her scholarship to good use by submitting
“affidavits about honor killing in court cases where girls or women, in flight
from being honor killed, were seeking political asylum or emancipation from
their families.” She has rendered a great service in presenting the fruit of
her sober research, which should be the starting point of any attempts to deal
with this barbaric custom, whether Islamic or merely tribal. Chesler has contributed,
and not for the first time, to the amelioration of the suffering of countless
women.
ـــــــــــــــــ
Copyright © 2018 Manhattan Institute for Policy Research,
Inc. All rights reserved.