Combatting coercive control in Covid-19: Perspectives from British Pakistani NGO workers in East London

打击 Covid-19 中的强制控制：东伦敦的英属巴基斯坦非政府组织工作人员的观点

• 批准号: 2605494
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Goldsmiths University of London
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Studentship
• 财政年份: 2021
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2021 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=studentship-2605494
• 关键词: Combatting; coercive; control; Covid; 19

This proposed research will be an ethnographic study of legal protections around coercive control, the most prevalent form of domestic violence in the UK and a criminal offence under the Serious Crime Act 2015. By focusing on the experiences of women working at domestic abuse NGOs in East London, this research will generate perspectives on how coercion and control unfold in multiply contested domestic settings. This project builds on scholarship on the politics of narration and storytelling (Cruikshank 1992; Jackson 2004; Das 2007), as well as biographical disruptions and reintegration (Day 2007) to investigate the lived realities of coercion and control in the context of a) Covid-19 related forced enclosure and b) the criminalisation of coercive control under the Serious Crimes Act 2015. Access to justice for non-English speaking migrant women is obstructed by structural inequalities such as lack of economic means, knowledge about support services, and language skills, both English and bureaucratic language required by state authorities (Merry 2006; Fassin 2013; Fuchs 2020). Through close attention to their words, actions, and silences (Das 2007), this research examines the intimate lives of NGO workers who act as brokers between the state and community (Webb 2012), navigate access to rights alongside notions of 'honour' and shame, traverse boundaries between public and private (Day and Goddard 2010), and contest normative demands on integrated biographies (Day 2007). It asks: how does this law affect the day-to-day lives of women in situations of coercion and control? What are the ways in which experiences of domestic abuse are communicated through words and silences? What does this reveal about the risks involved with trying to understand suffering in one's own terms (Jackson 2004) or the potential for violence in spoken words (Das 2007)? How do NGO workers then navigate the ethics of intervening in situations of domestic abuse? Anthropologists have examined the ways in which people come to understand themselves as ethical or political by a) addressing the suffering of others, b) recognising the suffering of their own groups, and c) in dialogue with others in similar situations (Day and Goddard 2010; Webb 2012). This projects aims to build on this literature by generating perspectives from women providing Urdu language support at NGOs in the East London boroughs of Waltham Forest and Redbridge. South Asian experiences have only recently been included in social science research on domestic abuse (Ahmed et al 2004; Dasgupta 2007; Kallovayalil 2010) with few studies examining inequalities that lie at its core (Puwar and Raghuram 2003; Gill and Brah 2014; Bi 2020). This research takes inspiration from abolitionist approaches in grassroots activism and critical race theory (Du Bois 1935; Lorde 1979; Taylor 2016; Vitale 2017) that emphasise the need for a) restorative justice and b) resource re-allocation away from the prison industrial complex to welfare for women and children affected by domestic violence.Through participant observation, life history interviews, and discourse analysis, this research will explore how in their simultaneous roles as NGO workers, relatives, neighbours, and activists, these women relate to legal processes, resist or reproduce hierarchies, and envisage solutions. Arguing against western feminist analyses of women's agency that accord it a normative status by simplistically centring desires to be free from subordination, this project builds on anthropological scholarship on Muslim women's worlds that demonstrate the multiple ways in which women create and steer their destinies in home, public and political settings (Mahmood 2004; Abu Lughod 2015; Elliot 2021).

这项拟议的研究将是一项关于强制控制的法律的保护的人种学研究，强制控制是英国最普遍的家庭暴力形式，也是2015年《严重犯罪法》规定的刑事犯罪。通过关注在东伦敦的家庭虐待非政府组织工作的妇女的经验，这项研究将产生关于胁迫和控制如何在多重竞争的家庭环境中展开的观点。该项目建立在叙事和讲故事的政治学（Cruikshank 1992;杰克逊2004;达斯2007）以及传记中断和重新整合（Day 2007）的基础上，以调查在a）与Covid-19相关的强制封闭和B）根据2015年《重罪法》将强制控制定为犯罪的背景下，胁迫和控制的现实。不讲英语的移民妇女诉诸司法的机会受到结构性不平等的阻碍，如缺乏经济手段、对支助服务的了解和语言技能，包括国家当局要求的英语和官僚语言（Merry，2006年; Fassin，2013年; Fuchs，2020年）。通过密切关注他们的言行和沉默（Das 2007），这项研究探讨了非政府组织工作人员的亲密生活，他们充当国家和社区之间的经纪人（Webb 2012），在“荣誉”和耻辱的概念下导航权利的获取，跨越公共和私人之间的界限，（Day和戈达德，2010），并对综合传记的规范性要求提出质疑（Day，2007）。报告提出的问题是：这项法律如何影响处于胁迫和控制情况下的妇女的日常生活？家庭暴力的经历是通过言语和沉默来传达的？这揭示了什么样的风险，试图理解自己的痛苦（杰克逊2004年）或潜在的暴力口语（达斯2007年）？那么，非政府组织工作人员如何在干预家庭虐待的情况下遵循道德规范？人类学家已经研究了人们如何通过以下方式来理解自己的道德或政治：a）解决他人的痛苦，B）认识到自己群体的痛苦，以及c）在类似情况下与他人对话（Day和戈达德2010; WebB 2012）。该项目旨在通过在沃尔瑟姆森林和雷德布里奇的东伦敦区的非政府组织提供乌尔都语支持的妇女提出观点，以此文献为基础。南亚的经验只是最近才被纳入关于家庭虐待的社会科学研究（Ahmed等人，2004年; Dasgupta，2007年; Kallovayalil，2010年），很少有研究探讨其核心的不平等问题（Puwar和Raghuram，2003年; Gill和Brah，2014年; Bi，2020年）。这项研究的灵感来自基层行动主义和批判种族理论中的废奴主义方法（Du Bois 1935; Lorde 1979; Taylor 2016; Vitale 2017），强调需要a）恢复性司法和B）资源重新分配，从监狱工业综合体转移到受家庭暴力影响的妇女和儿童的福利。通过参与者观察，生活史访谈，和话语分析，这项研究将探讨如何在他们的非政府组织工作人员，亲属，邻居，和活动家的同时，这些妇女涉及到法律的程序，抵制或复制等级制度，并设想解决方案。反对西方女权主义者对妇女机构的分析，即通过简单地集中渴望摆脱从属地位来雅阁规范地位，该项目建立在穆斯林妇女世界的人类学奖学金基础上，展示了妇女在家庭，公共和政治环境中创造和引导其命运的多种方式（Mahmood 2004; Abu Lughod 2015; Elliot 2021）。