ABSTRACT
Introduction Whilst there is an ongoing debate in various countries about the role of honourbased violence in society, it is important to note that there are historical and cultural precedents to honour and violence (Pitt-Rivers 1966; Stewart 1994; Frevert 1995; Blok 2001; Peltonen 2003; Liliequist 2009). This chapter, adopting a present and historical approach, explores honour-related violence in Britain and Turkey from the perspective of legislation and administrative processes. In addition, this chapter explores honour-related violence by situating it in the historical context of honour-based homicides in early twentieth-century Ovamboland, located in present-day Namibia and to the culture of duelling, which existed in various European countries between the seventeenth and early twentieth centuries. We have used honour broadly in the context of associated violence to explore how government interventions can mitigate against honour-based violence and the lessons to be learnt by practice and policy from a situated exploration of Turkey, Britain and Ovomboland in present-day Namibia. Honour is a universal concept but practices of honour-related violence vary significantly between different cultures and times. Certain forms of violence committed in the name of honour are culturally determined and acceptable in certain communities as the cultural norm (Gill & Brah, 2014). Honour is a construct created by a society or a group regarding the worth of its individual members. It is also a social currency through which individuals value and understand their worth (Stewart, 1994; Eshareturi et al., 2014). However, this view is dependent on societal or community validation and cannot be arrived at in isolation (Stewart, 1994). Honour also prescribes how an individual is to be treated within a group or society. In this context, it is important to also view honour as determining how individuals are treated within a group or society, consequently leading to their admission into, or exclusion from the group (Stewart, 1994). It is important to note that honour is not passive and that the code of honour requires activity on the part of an individual. Accordingly, individuals concerned with honour in order to maintain their status in the community must repeatedly perform actions which are deemed honourable in the context of their particular
society (Sarkamo, 2011, 2014). Honour is also related to warrior values. Within the warrior cultures of various cultural spheres, showing bravery in battle and killing one’s enemy in battle is seen as an honourable act (Sarkamo, 2011). Honour as a code on the one hand is also associated with patriarchal systems as witnessed in Turkey and matrilineal systems as exhibited by the Ovambo’s. On the other hand, honour is also a gendered code situated in the context of hegemonic masculinity (Connell, 1995; Hallenberg, 2013). It is an active system of dominance by male members from the top of societal hierarchy over other males, women and children. Situated in this context is the interpretation of gender and body in the context of honour (Liliequist, 2009). Accordingly, the honour of women is sexualized and chastity is deemed a virtue which the male members of society must protect. Individuals breaking this code are ostracized and punished by members of their community (Liliequist, 2009). Minorities and subcultures are often seen as the cultural “other”, often interpreting honour through culture and sometimes religion (Frick, 2014). Their acts of honourrelated violence are easily seen as non-rational by mainstream society on the one hand, yet, on the other hand, to their communities, violent acts in the interests of honour are easily considered natural and inevitable (Gill, 2006). This sets the stage for the debate on the role of values in encouraging the perpetrating of honour-based violence. Indeed, this begs the following questions: whose and what kind of values should be maintained and strengthened within society? Are some groups and societies more tolerant towards certain forms of honour-based violence than others? Should honour-based violence be distinguished from other forms of violence such as domestic violence? How should we ensure that interventions oriented towards tackling honour-related violence do not further entrench stereotypes associated with ethnic minority groups which could potentially lead to discrimination? In exploring the aforementioned, an example of the historical and societal roots of honour-related violence is provided. This example deconstructs the core basis of honour and its role within human society through an exploration of honourable and dishonourable “man killings” in Ovambo kin groups in the early twentieth century. It also explores the role of honour and its close connection to masculinity and the use of lethal violence within a kin society. An analysis of femicides in Turkey in the context of the political discourse of the Women’s Movement is also provided. This analysis highlights the much debated and problematic relation between legislation and the existing concepts of honour using Turkey as a case example. Following this, the state of affairs in Britain in which honour-based violence is unwittingly associated with domestic violence is explored. Finally, an exploration of honour-based violence in the European context of duelling1 is explored and lessons to be learnt posited.
