As with many immigrant or refugee communities residing in foreign countries, the customs, traditions, and mindsets of the immigrant peoples can differ very drastically from those of the host country. Different cultures have different value systems and most often, each culture believes their value system is the ‘right’ one, or the most ‘superior’ one, because it makes the most sense to them. When immigrants reside in a foreign host country, they abide by that country’s system of law in order to become a citizen, and to obtain access to jobs and education. In this way they take on the values of the host country to a certain extent, while usually maintaining their own cultural autonomy. As children of immigrants are socialized in and receive education and/or job training in the host country, they tend adopt and accept the culture and values of the host country much more so than their parents and grandparent’s generations did. This can and has caused many generational and multicultural gaps and tensions. In Sweden, for example, where gender equality and human rights have come very far and are at the core of the country’s profile, many clashes have occurred between the dominant society and immigrant communities whose value systems and cultures differ immensely from their own. Several ‘honor’ killings have occurred within immigrant communities in Sweden in the recent past, and have caused quite a public debate and has caused a reflection on the true meanings of respect, human rights, and multiculturalism. These acts have been interpreted by mainstream Swedish society as either expressions of men’s violence toward women or that they reflected patriarchal cultural practices. (Hellgren & Hobson, 2008: 385, 393)
First and foremost the secular Swedish legal system is an individualized justice system, and does not consider religious tradition a plausible defense for murder. Many groups and organizations within Swedish society have actively promoted multiculturalism and feminism, but through a somewhat narrow and cultural relativistic view, as many did and still do not understand why ‘honor’ killings and specific gender roles and expectations within the immigrant groups where ‘honor’ killings have occurred, make sense. There is a tendency for the Swedes to view their own society and mindset as more enlightened, just, and less bound by culture as opposed to say, a rural Pakistani society, where the norms and expectations are much different from their own.
Sweden has the most open immigration system in Europe. Immigrants have very little trouble accessing formal legal rights, however informally, many groups are still treated in a second class manner. For a country which values individualism, many in Swedish society still view immigrant communities as possessing very distinctive group identities, and generally do not investigate individual values within communities. In fact, the group identity, which is created by both Swedes and the immigrant communities, carries a stigma. Due to these culture clashes and as of recently, absent debate issues, most immigrant communities still lack a strong political voice to defend their traditions in the face of hostilities toward ‘honor’ killings. Obvious problems have resulted from the fact that many organizations that exist to help immigrant communities have been created for, not by, the immigrant communities themselves. (Hellgren & Hobson, 2008: 388) Those immigrant organizations that had been formed by immigrant communities, were harshly criticized by then prime minister, Goran Persson, for not playing a more active role to prevent ‘honor’ killing from occurring and for not having more women represented on their executive boards. Imposing their own views on what ‘should’ be, was the main course that was taken as a means for a solution by the Swedish government and societies, instead of including these immigrant organizations in the policy-making process. (Hellgren & Hobson, 2008: 393)
In response to the public outrage over several cases of ‘honor’ killings, the immigrant communities in which they occurred sought to distance themselves from the acts, and emphasizing that they were private family acts, that did not reflect their collective cultural beliefs. These ‘honor’ killings had occurred within Kurdish and Pakistani families. Many from these communities stated that because their cultures had been so marginalized, due to lack of education and recognition, and consistent oppression, that specific families created their own rules and values, which do not reflect their culture as a whole. These values reflect the fact that in the face of marginalization, ‘honor’ is often the only thing a family can realistically strive for in life. (Hellgren & Hobson, 2008: 393) It has proven difficult for Sweden to open up to dialogues addressing culture conflicts to face these issues, because it challenges Sweden’s self and international image as the ‘good society’, which embodies gender equality and human rights. (Hellgren & Hobson, 2008: 398)
Hellgren, Zenia, and Barbara Hobson
2008 Cultural dialogues in the good society: The case of honor killings in Sweden. Ethnicities 8(3): 385-400. http://etn.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/8/3/385
No comments:
Post a Comment