How is intersectionality helping you rethink the contemporary issue of human rights abuse?
Intersectionality proposes that the social characteristics that make up a person cannot be viewed individually, as they interact, compounding each other to create unique experiences and disadvantages (Crenshaw, 1991). Intersectionality’s raison d’être was to explain and challenge how black women experienced discrimination: arguing that racism and sexism intersect, creating an experience unique to being both black and a woman. At its inception, Crenshaw (1991, p.1299) noted a potential for intersectionality in characteristics beyond race and gender: which have since been explored by numerous scholars.
Intersectionality therefore provides a lens to analyse many contemporary issues, including human rights abuse. It sheds light on human rights abuses from several angles: how they can occur; the varying impacts and consequences; and the responses to them. We will examine these aspects using the example of the human rights abuses of Rohingya women and girls (RWG).
As a Muslim ethnic minority in Buddhist majority Myanmar, Rohingya people have suffered decades of persecution by the government, military and citizens. Persecution was amplified by the 1982 citizenship law, which stripped Rohingyas of their citizenship. In 2017, violence escalated resulting in a “textbook example of ethnic cleansing”. This blog will use intersectionality to analyse three examples of human rights abuses in RWG: gender-based violence; child marriage; and the consequences of genocide for surviving women.
It's worth noting that emphasising the abuses RWG face due to their specific identities may be further stigmatising, creating negative stereotypes. Additionally, focussing on specific characteristics may marginalise and trivialise the experiences of groups that don’t fit all intersecting categories. Recognising these limitations, we use intersectionality to understand the experiences of some RWG without comparison or hierarchy.
RWG experience brutal sexual violence (Priddy et al., 2022), predominantly by military perpetrators. RWG are targeted due to the intersection of their gender and ethnicity (Bond, 2021) to instil terror and for ethnic cleansing (Priddy et al, 2022, p.219): forcing pregnant women to miscarry, removing childbearing ability, or impregnating them with the ‘dominant ethnicity’ (Anwary, 2022). Furthermore, being female, Rohingya, and Muslim enable persecution in forms unique to that intersection. RWG have been forced to remove their burqas during abuse (Anwary, 2022); and derogatory language often refers to their religion, ethnicity and gender. Intersectionality illustrates how human rights abuse happens: the most vulnerable group - ethnic and religious minority women, are abused by dominant ethnicity males. However, whilst intersectionality can explain these power imbalances it doesn’t explain the choice to exercise dominance through human rights abuse.
Moreover, gender-based violence and intimate partner violence are common and often seen as a private issue in Rohingya culture (Guglielmi, Mitu and Seager, 2021). This cultural view means RWG cannot seek support due to stigmatisation, increasing their burden. Lack of legal status due to the Burma Citizenship Law 1982, combined with apparent immunity for perpetrators (Anwary, 2022) and police perpetration, means victims are unable to get justice. Government oppression and cultural factors mean RWG are typically poor and lack education; further reducing their agency. In this example, we see how factors including gender, ethnicity, religion, cultural beliefs, poverty and legal status intersect to make RWG vulnerable to gender-based violence, and shape how they endure it.
Within Rohingya culture, child marriage, a human rights abuse, is common. In Bangladesh, which hosts ~1,000,000 Rohingya refugees the absence of marriage restrictions mean child marriages occur frequently. Poverty and food insecurity are drivers for families to arrange child marriage, which reduces family burden. Gendered views are significant: girls are deemed to need the protection of marriage. However, this protection is in name only: child marriage increases gender-based violence and results in worse psychological outcomes for girls (Guglielmi, Mitu and Seager, 2021). Here gender, culture, displacement and poverty combine to create a heightened risk of child marriage for Rohingya girls and produce suffering specific to that intersection.
Finally, intersectionality enables us to understand some of the impacts that human rights abuses of Rohingya men, namely their mass-murder, have on their surviving wives and daughters. Rohingya culture is patriarchal, with women expected to fulfil domestic roles and often restricted to the home by the conservative practice of ‘purdah’. These gender norms mean RWG lack the education, skills and societal approval to find work to support themselves. Restrictions in Myanmar and Bangladesh impede Rohingya’s ability to work, which is further exacerbated by cultural gender views. Stigmatisation and ostracization mean that women-led households are isolated: increasing the risk of gender based violence. Isolation, vulnerability, lack of skills, and cultural and legal barriers increase susceptibility to exploitation, including sex work. Here, using intersectionality we can understand the impact of one human rights abuse, the mass-murder of Rohingya men, on RWG, and see how through the intersectional disadvantages of these women, they may experience further human rights abuse.
This blog has introduced an intersectional analysis of human rights abuse, highlighting how many factors compound, making RWG extremely vulnerable to these abuses. It demonstrates how intersectionality shapes the experience and impact of human rights abuse: particularly in the context of social stigmatisation and lack of justice. Intersectionality may be better suited to examining the consequences and impact of human rights abuse rather than why they occur, which requires a multi-theory understanding of violence and power-relations. Despite its limitations, without an intersectional perspective it would be easy to miss this interaction of factors and how they shape the impact of human rights abuse on RWG’s lives; overlooking the complex needs of survivors.
References
Anwary, A. (2022) ‘Sexual violence against women as a weapon of Rohingya genocide in Myanmar’, The international journal of human rights, 26(3), pp. 400–419. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2021.1931136
Bond, J. (2021) Global intersectionality and contemporary human rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Crenshaw, K. (1991) ‘Mapping the Margins: Intersectionality, Identity Politics, and Violence against Women of Color’, Stanford law review, 43(6), pp. 1241–1299. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039
Guglielmi, S., Mitu, K. and Seager, J. (2021) ‘‘I just keep quiet’: addressing the challenges of married Rohingya girls and creating opportunities for change’, The European Journal of Development Research, 33, pp. 1232–1251. doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-021-00437-6
Priddy, G. et al. (2022) ‘Gender-based violence in a complex humanitarian context: Unpacking the human sufferings among stateless Rohingya women’, Ethnicities, 22(2), pp. 215–232. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/14687968221078373
AUTHOR:
Madelaine Pietrzkiewicz
Course:
