A new book documents the spread of a vicious practice into the West
By Ibn Warrick, CJ
A Family Conspiracy: Honor Killing, by Phyllis Chesler (New English Review Press, 348 pp., $28.75)
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.
On another topic, I’ve wanted to say something since I heard that Prince William was visiting. He should have been made aware that Britain is the major cause of the mess today, the loss of Jordan to the Jewish People, and the obscene prevention of Jewish refugees from Germany before the Holocaust. AND killing and wounding starving former camp inmates who manages to get ashore , including the execrable treatment of the EXODUS.
But the MAIN point I would have made before his arrival, would have been that …..THERE ARE NO OCCUPIED TERRITORIES IN THIS AREA.
Let him visit or not, what difference does it make, the British are Anti-Semites as usual and always. Israelis who “greased” over the visit showed themselves to be really “small people” in character.
@ david melech:
Wunderbar….!! The mother should have got 25 years and the brothers life without parole, in solitary. Prison sentences are supposed to match the crimes, and also to show others the example of what happens if they stray along the same paths.
An Arab wouldn’t mind going to jail to 2 years for murder to save “honour”, a these barbarians call it. it’s very cheap at the price. But if they had to forfeit the rest of their lives they’d think again.
And…….a question……Is it not “strange” that a race of slaughterers and primitive half- humans would have any sense of honour at all…however perverted.
They kid themselves and try to fool others.
@ david melech:
I’ve just reread the story mother got 2 years jail time and the bros 10 years each.
How about this one 16 year old girl killed by her mother, why she was unmarried and pregnant. How was she killed? First she had her head forced into a plastic bag, then knifed. So far so good, mother can now look her neighbours in the face. She received standard sentence 3/4 months jail time.
What’s missing here is who impregnated her? The rapists recieved no sentence for the rape. So who were the rapists? HER 2 BROTHERS, this was not done in paki nor some other backwood muzy country , it was occupied ISREAL, under terrorist rule.