Responses to Okin
Okin’s critique of multiculturalism generated a significant debate and responses to
her essay are contained in the book Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women?(Okin’s
essay is the first in the book). Below we explore the most interesting of the responses
to Okin from that book. We are not necessarily endorsing all (or any) of these
counter-arguments; rather, our aim is to stimulate debate.
1.Valid and invalid cultural defences If we are studying minority cultural practices,
then it is important that we are sensitive to the context, and this can work both
for and against Okin, although in both cases she can be criticised for being
insensitive to context. As Katha Pollitt argues, if a man murders his wife because
he believes she has been unfaithful, and then appeals to ‘his culture’ as mitigation,
we can reasonably ask the question – is he telling the truth? Are men allowed
to do this ‘back home’ (Pollitt, 1999: 28–9)? Even if they are, is shame the same
concept when your culture is in the majority as against being in a minority?
Furthermore, if we take shariah as the legal basis for the cultural defence, the
‘right’ of the husband to kill his wife is based on a conception of law which is
grounded in equivalence, such that even if a man is permitted to carry out a
sentence, he must be authorised by a court. In addition, shariah requires a high
level of proof. In conclusion, the murder is not a cultural act because the
background structure which would make it such an act is absent. Multiculturalists
are not, contrary to what Okin claims, committed to defending the husband in
this case.
2.Source material Related to the last point, Okin culls her examples from criminal
cases in the United States. As Homi Bhabha argues, this distorts the cultural
context because ‘cultural information’ is being used for very specific ends
(Bhabha, 1999: 81). Furthermore, the forum is alien to those cultural practices.
Okin uses concepts, such as patriarchy, without respect for the context. Her
treatment of religion can similarly be criticised. When discussing clitoridectomy
she cites an interview in the New York Timesas authoritative. Obviously, Okin
is only one writer, but her style of argument typifies much discussion of
multiculturalism by those critical of it: the use of inappropriate sources reveals
a serious failure to engage with the context of behaviour.
3.Is multiculturalism bad for women? There are two approaches to the relationship
between gender and culture. You could argue that culture is especially badfor
women, and not just quantitatively but qualitatively – that is, culture is gendered
- or you could maintain that culture is bad for everyone.The second argument
might seem a bizarre defence of multiculturalism, but it could be used in order
to move to a more sophisticated idea of the relationship between culture and
gender. Take the example of circumcision. Boys are also circumcised: is male
circumcision ‘genital mutilation’? We need to consider the reasons for male
circumcision: medical grounds in specific cases (everywhere), on general medical
grounds (particularly in the USA) and on ritual/religious grounds. Female
circumcision takes three forms (see Parekh, 2006: 275–6) of which two are not
equivalent to male circumcision. What reasons are given for these practices?
Control of sexuality dominates reasoning, but then the great monotheistic
religions have all been concerned with controlling sexuality, and not just of
women, but also male sexuality. However, there is no doubt that – viewed from
Chapter 15 Multiculturalism 351