Cynthia Werner, PhD
Professor of Anthropology
College of Liberal Arts and Director of ADVANCE in the Dean of Faculties Office, Texas A&M University
My research is geographically based in the region of Central Asia, an area that includes the former “Muslim republics” of the Soviet Union. I have played a leading role in scholarly debates about the rise of non-consensual bride abduction in the 1990s. In a 2004 publication, I situated this practice within a historical context, arguing that the frequency of “non-consensual” bride abduction was relatively low during the Soviet years (when gender equality was a state priority) and then increased in the post-Soviet years (with the rise of nationalism, corruption, and economic disruption). I expanded on these ideas in a second publication (2009) that explained how discourses of shame and tradition have been mobilized in ways that help perpetuate non-consensual bride abduction, especially in Kyrgyzstan where the practice has been re-imagined as a national tradition. A more recent paper (2019) teases out some of the similarities and differences between “kidnap culture” in Central Asia and “rape culture” on U.S. campuses. This short brief delineates some of the key arguments in that paper, including the idea that institutions play an important role in supporting or thwarting social change.
Despite cultural differences, there are striking similarities in the way that young women are impacted by patriarchy in the United States and Central Asia. In the United States, one out of four college women are likely to become the victims of sexual assault before they graduate (Cantor et al. 2015; Fisher et al. 2000; Koss et al. 1987; Krebs et al. 2007). Meanwhile, in some regions of Central Asia, the odds of a young woman being kidnapped against her will by a man who wants to marry her are similarly high (Handrahan 2004; Kleinbach et al. 2005; Shields 2006; Werner 2004). The majority of women opt to remain silent (in the case of rape) and to accept the marriage (in the case of bride abduction). In both societies, the men who commit these acts can rely on the perpetuation and reproduction of a patriarchal value system to protect them from strong sanctions. Even in the era of the #metoo movement, victims of rape fear that their credibility will be questioned and their behavior will be scrutinized. Similarly, men who abduct women know that they are likely to get away with it because the bride will be convinced that he is a nice guy and that this type of marriage is a national tradition. They will also accept out of fear of the stigma of being a girl who returned home.
These patriarchal practices are not limited to the perpetrator and the victim. Indeed, the reason that the patriarchal value system is so powerful is that the ideas and beliefs exemplified in rape myths and kidnap myths are shared by a large segment of society. Although there are significant cultural differences, young, unmarried women in both societies are still regarded as “sexual gatekeepers” in the sense that they are likely be judged for being sexually permissive in ways that men would not be judged. Sexual assault and bride abduction bring a woman’s status as a sexual gatekeeper into question. After a woman has been sexually assaulted or kidnapped, members of the community (and the household) play a role in influencing how a woman responds to these acts. Victims of sexual assault may be verbally threatened by friends of the assailant, while victims of kidnapping might be verbally pressured by family members of the groom to accept the marriage. In both settings, public scrutiny is likely to intensify at the moment that a woman attempts to resist patriarchy by reporting a rape or rejecting a suitor. A woman who chooses to report a sexual assault to campus authorities or to the police is likely to face public questions about her behavior before she was assaulted (i.e. “did she deserve it?”) and questions about consent (i.e. “did it really happen?”). Additionally, in Central Asia, a woman who rejects a marriage is likely to deal with public scrutiny regarding her character and marriageability.
Although the comparison of these two cases demonstrates the power of patriarchal value systems in two different settings, I am optimistic that the value system is capable of change. State actors (and campus administrators) can and should play a role in attempting to change the cultures that normalize rape and non-consensual kidnapping. In this regard, the comparison between kidnap culture and rape culture has the potential to be instructive.
In Central Asia, there are signs to suggest that kidnap culture has become more entrenched in Central Asia in the past twenty-five years, especially in Kyrgyzstan (Werner 2009). Although the Soviet government was by no means ideal, it did introduce and support polices that supported gender equity. The fall of the Soviet Union ushered in a revival of ethno-national identities and the rise of non-consensual bride abduction. In Kyrgyzstan, where non-consensual bride abduction appears to be higher than other countries, this practice has increasingly been re-imagined as a national tradition (Kleinbach and Salimjanova 2007; Werner 2009; Werner et al. 2018). Consequently, local activists who challenge the practice are viewed as traitors to their ethnicity. Government officials generally dismiss the efforts of activists and deny that bride abduction is a problem. Researchers for the Human Rights Watch report note that police officers “treated it as a laughing matter, giggling when the topic was brought up” and offering to “kidnap Human Rights Watch’s researchers while they were in town (Shields 2006, 126). These developments suggest that kidnap culture remains entrenched in Central Asia, and the psychological impacts of kidnapping are likely to be compounded by the fact that there is minimal social and moral support for women who are kidnapped against their will.
The Central Asia case is instructive for understanding the U.S. case, and the need for strong institutional support at both the national and local university levels. The federal government and campus administrators have been playing a role in shaping key changes since 2011 with new federal guidelines for Title IX of the Education Amendment. In response to these new guidelines and the growing number of Title IX investigations, many campuses have changed the way they handle sexual assault cases, by developing victim-centered approaches and introducing new educational programs that focus on bystander awareness and “yes means yes” approaches to consent (Welch 2014; Winerip 2014). These developments, and the subsequent emergence of the #Metoo movement, have helped erode rape culture in the United States. These developments provide psychological and moral support for sexual assault victims, and ideally also reduce the frequency of sexual assault. As the Central Asia case suggests, it is crucial that federal and university support for these changes continue in order to have a lasting impact.
References
Cantor, David, Bonnie Fisher, Susan Chibnall, Reanne Townsent, Hyunshik Lee, Carol Bruce, and Gail Thomas. 2015. “Report on the AAU Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct.” Association of American Universities. September 21, 2015. Rockville, Maryland: Westat.
Fisher, Bonnie S., Francis T. Cullen, and Michael G. Turner. 2000. “The Sexual Victimization of College Women. Research Report.” Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice and Bureau of Justice Statistics.
Handrahan, Lori. 2004. “Hunting for Women: Bride-Kidnapping in Kyrgyzstan.” International Feminist Journal of Politics 6 (2):207-233.
Kleinbach, Russell, Mehrigiul Ablezova, and Medina Aitieva. 2005. “Kidnapping for Marriage (ala kachuu) in a Kyrgyz Village.” Central Asian Survey 24 (2):191-202.
Kleinbach, Russell and Lilly Salimjanova. 2007. “Kyz ala kachuu and adat: Non-Consensual Bride Kidnapping and Tradition in Kyrgyzstan.” Central Asian Survey 26 (2):217-233.
Koss, Mary P., Christine A. Gidycz, and Nadine Wisniewski. 1987. “The Scope of Rape: Incidence and Prevalence of Sexual Aggression and Victimization in a National Sample of Higher Education Students.” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 55 (2):162-70.
Krebs, Christopher P., Christine H. Lindquist, Tara D. Warner, Bonnie S. Fisher, and Sandra L. Martin. 2007. “The Campus Sexual Assault (CSA) Study: Final Report.” Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, US Department of Justice.
Shields, Acacia. 2006. “Reconciled to Violence: State Failure to Stop Domestic Abuse and Abduction of Women in Kyrgyzstan.” Human Rights Watch Report. September 26, 2006. Accessed March 17, 2015. https://www.hrw.org/report/2006/09/26/reconciled-violence/state-failure-stop-domestic-abuse-and-abduction-women.
Welch, William M. 2014. “California adopts ‘yes means yes’ law.” USA Today. September 29, 2014.
Werner, Cynthia. 2004. “Women, Marriage, and the Nation-State: The Rise of Non-Consensual Bride Kidnapping in Post-Soviet Kazakhstan.” In Reconceptualizing Central Asia: States and Societies in Formation, edited by Pauline Luong Jones, 59-80. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Werner, Cynthia. 2009. “Bride Abduction in Post-Soviet Central Asia: Marking a Shift Towards Patriarchy through Local Discourses of Shame and Tradition.” Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 15 (2):314-331.
Werner, Cynthia, Christopher Edling, Charles Becker, Elena Kim, Russell Kleinbach, Fatima Sartbay, and Woden Teachout. 2018. “Bride Kidnapping in Post-Soviet Eurasia: A Roundtable Discussion” Central Asian Survey 37(4):582-601.
Cynthia Werner. 2019. “Reflections on Rape Culture and Kidnap Culture: A Cross-Cultural Comparison of the Psychological and Social Forces that Reinforce Patriarchy.” In The Psychology of Women in Patriarchy. Edited by Holly Mathews and Adriana Manago. University of New Mexico Press. Published in cooperation with the School of Advanced Research Press. Albuquerque, New Mexico. Pp. 211-233.
Winerip, Michael. 2014. “Stepping Up to Stop Sexual Assault.” The New York Times. February 7, 2014.