Hunting for Women: Bride-kidnapping in Kyrgyzstan

Hunting for Women

BRIDE-KIDNAPPING IN KYRGYZSTAN

LORI HANDRAHANWashington DC, USA

Abstract ———————————————————————In 1983 Benedict Anderson famously claimed that the ethnic fraternity enabledmillions of people to kill, and more so to die, over the past two centuries, in the nameof their perceived community. While plenty of subsequent research focused on boththe ethnic and violent part of this equation, the fraternal aspect has gone almostunnoticed in mainstream academia. In contrast, male identity, although not necessarilyethnic, and links to violence has held a prominent place in feminist research.

Acknowledgement and exploration of the associations between male ethnicityidentity and violence is essential to the field of ethnic and racial studies becausegendered violence appears to be a crucial element of consolidating male ethnicity. Ifthe gendered elements of ethnicity continue to be ignored, violent ethnic conflict willremain a ‘murky’ area. Supported by emerging feminist research on ethnicity andestablished feminist work on fraternity and violence, the following research examinesone act, bride-kidnapping in Kyrgyzstan, in an attempt to explore the relativelyignored links between ethnic identity, violence and gender.——————————————————————— Keywordsbride-kidnapping, Central Asia, ethnicity, forced marriage, fraternity, gender,Kyrgyzstan, male violence

Male dominance is sexual . . . male sexual role . . . centres on aggressive intrusionon those with less power.

(MacKinnon 1989: 127)

INTRODUCTION

Women around the world might not list among their daily concerns thepossibility of being kidnapped yet this is a reality for many young Kyrgyz

International Feminist Journal of Politics, 6:2 June 2004, 207–233

ISSN 1461–6742 print/ISSN 1468–4470 online © 2004 Taylor & Francis Ltd

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals DOI: 10.1080/1461674042000211308

women. While women, elsewhere, may worry about grades, sports or physicalappearance, in Kyrgyzstan, a former Soviet country in Central Asia, young,single Kyrgyz women add to their list fear of kidnapping.1 The level of anxietyover kidnapping is difficult for outsiders to conceive. For Kyrgyz womenkidnapping by a group of drunk, male strangers, and forced marriage to one,is a constant and serious threat. The phenomenon called bride-kidnappingappears to be a method for Kyrgyz men to mark their ethnic coming-of-age –hunting, capturing and physically forcing Kyrgyz women to marry them.

Bride-kidnapping is not unique to Kyrgyzstan. This practice occurs in theCaucasus, areas in the Middle East, South East Asia and elsewhere; however,what makes the case of Kyrgyzstan noteworthy is an apparent surge inkidnapping since independence from the USSR in 1991. The increase may bedue to a perception that kidnapping is a positive Kyrgyz cultural identitymarker denied under Soviet rule.2 Although still illegal under the CriminalCode of the Kyrgyz Republic Normative Acts 1994, kidnapping now appearsto be rampant. While there are no published statistics on kidnapping, a 1999survey, as well as three years of persistent observation by the author, provideevidence that bride-kidnapping has become endemic. Having researched andwritten several articles about kidnapping from the female perspective, as agender specialist concerned with ethnicity the author wanted to betterunderstand male attitudes towards kidnapping.3 Because bride-kidnappingappears to represent an act of male Kyrgyz ethnic identity, it provides aconcrete example through which to examine the dynamics of gender andethnicity. In an effort to understand better the links among male identity,ethnicity and violence against women, the following article explores theresponses from 383 men, distributed geographically across the country, onthe practice of kidnapping.

BACKGROUND

Modern Kyrgyzstan is a jumble of dramatically confused and overlaid identi-ties. At the crossroads between East and West, with the ancient Silk Roadrunning through the capital city of Bishkek, the people of Kyrgyzstan havefor centuries been subject to prevailing rulers – from the Mongols to theRussians. After seventy years of Soviet rule and intense Russification, modernKyrgyzstan now encompasses over fifty-one different ethnic groups, manyspilt between Kyrgyzstan and neighbouring countries.

While a revived male Muslim identity is increasingly significant, for Kyrgyzmen, bride-kidnapping – more than any other ‘renewed tradition’ – has,apparently, become a primary act defining cultural identity and manhood.Kidnapping seems to represent a means for many Kyrgyz men to recapturetheir post-Soviet identity in a confused, desperate and often violent, butdefinitive act. Kyrgyz women, for their part, are expected to submit to thispractice if they are ‘real Kyrgyz women’ and want to take part in building

208 International Feminist Journal of Politics –––––––––––––––––––––––––––

their nation. Bride-kidnapping has come to be understood as a fundamental‘Kyrgyz tradition’ neither imposed nor transported but home-grown on thejailoos (mountain pastures) of the Tien Shen mountain range.

The severe climate and lifestyle of mountain nomads historically mandatedcapable and equal male–female partnerships and excellent equestrian skills.Initially bride-kidnapping may have been devised as a means to ensuremarriages that might improve survival rates. In variations of the tradition, aman asked the father’s permission for a horse race with the desired daughter.If the father agreed, the daughter received a 15-second start on her horse anda thick leather whip to beat off the man. If the man could catch the womanand kiss her while on horseback, then he won ‘the right’ to ask for thewoman’s hand in marriage. Descriptions of this tradition can be found inKyrgyz writer, Chingis Aitmatov’s story ‘Jamalya’. The resulting tradition isknown as kyskuumay – or ‘kiss the girl’ – and is now played as a game atfestivals representing Kyrgyz traditions.

Bride-kidnapping today is radically different. Although many elite Kyrgyzwho live in the capital city may dispute the fact that violent kidnapping iswidespread, the US State Department 1996 Country Report notes that ‘violenceagainst women is a problem which the authorities often ignore’ (p. 1). Whilethere are some ‘staged’ kidnappings, those that occur with consent of bothparties (bride and groom) after a dating period, many kidnappings appear tobe unwelcome and unforeseen by the ‘bride’ in question. Staged kidnappingsare the western equivalent of eloping and will be labelled as such in this article.This research is concerned with forced kidnapping not mutual consentedelopement.

Very often forced kidnapping involves three or four men, a car and vodka.The men go in search of a girl/woman that they know or deem attractive.Sometimes kidnapping is done in daylight with the woman captured as she iswalking down the street. Other times the kidnapping is planned at night andinvolves tricking the woman out of her house or yurt (tent). The man often hasa full wedding feast already waiting at home. Once the kidnapped womancrosses the threshold of the man’s home, the oldest woman in the man’s familyplaces the jooluk (scarf ) on her head and the kidnapped woman is consideredmarried. Some people assert that marriage happens later, with consummation,which may involve rape. If after such a marriage the woman decides to escape,she is likely to face rejection by her family and her village because she has‘dishonoured’ Kyrgyz tradition. Many men and women claim it is an honour tobe kidnapped because bride-kidnapping is seen as the ultimate confirmation ofa woman’s worth; ‘only beautiful women are kidnapped’, etc.

FEMINISM, ETHNICITY AND MASCULINITIES THEORIES

Feminist theories of gendered ethnicity, masculinities and transversalism willbe brought to bear on the results of this research, in order to assist in

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– Lori Handrahan/Hunting for women 209

analysing the data in a framework that attempts to understand the linkbetween male ethnicity, identity and violence against women of the ethniccollective. Currently, there is a deficiency of gender and ethnic analysis withinand without the academy.4 The few sources that do exist deal more withnationalism and nation rather than internal and external ethnicity and ethnicversus gender self-identification. Gender and identity consideration have alsobeen absent from most research on race, ethnic and gender relations and bothgender and ethnicity have been marginalized from core socio-political sciencetheory. Therefore, vital understanding of relations between gender and ethni-city and socio-political science is still lacking (Allen 1998: 49). Only in thelate 1990s did gendered understandings of ethnicity begin to emerge stronglyin the academy, largely in relation to: marriage and labour markets (Barotet al. 1999); issues of gendered citizenship and identity (Charles and Hintjens1998; Yuval-Davis and Werbner 1999); gender and peace across ethnic lines(Cockburn 1998); and gender and nation/nationalism (Yuval-Davis 1997).

Nira Yuval-Davis and Flora Anthias have created the most comprehensiveresearch on gender and ethnicity in a typology of five ethnic/national/stateprocesses in which women take part as gendered beings. These are: (1) asbiological reproducers of members of ethnic collectives; (2) as reproducers ofthe boundaries of ethnic/national groups; (3) as central participants in theideological reproduction of the collective and transmitters of its culture; (4)as signifiers of ethnic/national differences – as a focus and symbol inideological discourses used in the construction, reproduction and transforma-tion of ethnic/national categories; and (5) as participants in ethnic national,economic, political and military struggles. In this typology kidnapping isrepresented in processes one and two: the value of ethnic woman in theirrole as biological reproducers of the ethnic collective and reproducers of theethnic boundaries.

In the task of examining male identity and violence, nascent genderedethnic analysis is well supported by established feminist work on masculini-ties, used as a foundation in this research, since masculinity theory providesnecessary knowledge of the dynamics among violence, power and genderedidentities. R. W. Connell (1987, 1993) and Lynne Segal (1990, 1993) havecompleted some of the most relevant research for this study on male violenceexamining why manhood is defined by and through acts of violence against,and dominance of, women. Feminism that has engaged with micro-levelanalysis of the family/community (Hester et al. 1996) and macro-levelcontemplations of the state/international system (MacKinnon 1989; Tickner1992) as well as the collective work in Hester et al. (1996), the outcome of aconference examining gender violence and masculinity,5 support the analy-tical results of this research. Additionally, Goldstein (2001) provides somestrikingly similar paradigms that will be used to analyse the results of thisresearch.

Connell’s examinations of how variables of power, violence and genderedidentities converge to create ‘maleness’ or, as he calls it, hegemonic masculin-


ity are particularly relevant to an exploration of kidnapping (Connell 1987:280). Connell (1987: 109, 108) confirms that ‘the main axis of the powerstructure of gender is the general connection of authority with masculinity. . . imposing order in and through culture is a large part of this effort’. Thisallows an understanding of kidnapping not as a bizarre, outdated, relic of theunder-developed world but as a tool of masculine hegemony establishingethnic-cultural order, similar in process, if not detail, to masculine hegemonyoperating anywhere male dominance is created and reified. Kyrgyz bride-kidnapping may be unique in cultural/ethnic implementation but Connell’sresearch demonstrates that the act itself provides only one example ofworldwide hegemonic masculinity.

Segal affords knowledge of the location of ‘masculine identities and behav-iour in relation to sexual politics’, i.e. that male hegemony is located in sexualcontrol (Segal 1990: x). Since kidnapping is not only an act of male power,violence and authority but also an exploit specifically concerned with sexualdominance and control of women, Segal’s theorizing on the acquisition of malehegemony, through sexual politics, is vital. ‘Collectively, it is clear, calling upimages of male sexual performance serves to consolidate and confirm mascu-linity, and to exclude and belittle women’ (Segal 1990: 211). Sexual violenceis defined as ‘a gendered phenomenon within the context of patriarchal socialrelations’ with the understanding that ‘violence from men to women is likelyto be sexual, as in rape or sexual assault’ (Hester et al. 1996: 3).

TRANSVERSALISM

This research is supported by the body of feminist theory that contends thatfeminism is at its best when an understanding of different forms of patriarchaloppression can be deconstructed. Understanding the context in which each‘woman’ exists enables global feminism to retain its vigilance against allforms of patriarchy, without getting caught in the paralysis of culturalrelativism, the ‘cultural’ smokescreen behind which male patriarchal societiesoften hide.6 Specifically this research is supported by Nira Yuval-Davis’ theoryof transversalism. According to Yuval-Davis, the term ‘transversal politics’originates from Italian feminist work and is meant to connote ‘universalityin diversity’ (Yuval-Davis 1997: 125). This involves maintaining a starting/standing point/perspective coupled with the flexibility to recognize, but nothomogenize, other starting/standing point/perspectives.

Transversal politics provides a mechanism for feminist solidarity that canrecognize women’s social and national divisions, and address the all too com-mon exceptionalism of western feminists, which assumes that non-westernwomen will define their problems and achievements in terms of an ‘imaginedfree white liberal democracy’ (Yuval-Davis 1997: 118). Transversalism alsoavoids the danger of multiculturalism, which too often understands the ‘com-munity’ as internally homogenous and thereby reinforces the power of


unelected traditional male community leaders (Yuval-Davis and Werbner 1999:1–38). Relevant to the research presented here, which explores male definitionsof ethnicity that are coupled with violence against women, Yuval-Davis linkstransversalism explicitly with a thesis about the gendered nature of ethnicity,arguing that ‘women’s ethnicity often is and should be different from that ofmen’ and that feminist politics should incorporate female ‘ethnic’ differencesinto its agenda via transversalism (Yuval-Davis 1998: 168).

Gender and Identity in Kyrgyzstan

In applying a transversal theory to this research on kidnapping, there are twosocio-cultural aspects relevant to prevailing gender roles for Kyrgyz womentoday. First, an ‘Islamic’ resurgence in Kyrgyz society today is carryingdifferent understandings of ‘woman’. This indigenous ‘remembering’ is alsoinfluenced by increased funds, presence and conversion activity supportedby the Turks and Saudis as they attempt to bring Central Asia under theirinfluence (Corley 1999; Recknagel and Pannier 1999; MacWilliams 2003).The new ‘remembered’ Muslim influence is highly varied but is predominantlyconcerned with the renewal of traditions that increase male power. Revivedpractices, include (1) kalym, the price that is paid, by money, property orlivestock, to acquire a bride; (2) a widow may not marry anyone else of herchoosing but is required to remarry the next of kin in her dead husband’sfamily, i.e. brother, uncle, etc. This is a customary tradition in Kyrgyzstan,sometimes called jenesin aluu; (3) bride-kidnapping, the focus of this research,is the practice of ‘stealing’ a bride when one cannot afford the kalym or doesnot wish to pay. This is a nomadic tradition often understood to be Muslim;(4) making polygamy legal, which was debated for two full days in theParliament on the basis that it is a Muslim tradition the Russians prohibitedand if Kyrgyz men want to be ‘real’ then they must reinstate it. Outlawingvodka, which is forbidden by Muslim tradition, was not discussed.7

Tribalism

Tribalism represents a second consideration for gender roles since tribalism isessentially patriarchal rule through a biological, paternal, kinship lineage, withpower reserved for certain essential male biological descendants. In the realmof tribalism women are ‘channels of non-descent’ and, hence, non-important(Bloch 1987: 330). In an effort to locate public and private identities, manypeople have returned to the tribal roots that shaped this region of the worldonly eighty years ago.8 The resurgence of tribal norms in modern life oftenresults, and Kyrgyzstan is no exception, in patriarchal and barbaric rule-by-terror, resplendent with human rights violations (Moghadam 1997).

In Kyrgyzstan, tribalism has resulted in practices such as the revived aksakal


courts. Aksakal (literally white beard) courts consist of the oldest men in thevillage, who make all the village decisions, including moral and family, and rulethe village as an elected town and family morality council. Although theaksakal are not elected, they have been given powers of judgement and punish-ment by President Akaev and the police force are under their control. In spite ofreported cases of the aksakals handing out medieval punishment, such as publicstoning for violations of local customs, President Akaev has publicly supportedthe role of aksakal courts and has reinforced and revived their importance inKyrgyz society.9 The aksakals are also supported by locally formed militiasor choro. Little restriction has been placed on their activities by regular lawenforcement bodies. In some villages an azindan, or place of illegal detention,has been established. Corporal and capital punishment by the aksakal and chorohave been reported by the US State Department Human Rights Report (1997).10

Of aksakals Amnesty International notes:

Allegations have recently been brought to the attention of Amnesty Internationalconcerning activities authorized by the so-called ‘elders’ (aksakal) courts, whichwere set up following a call reportedly made by President Akaev at a congressof elders in January 1995 for ‘the formation of a wide network of autonomousand active civil institutions, independent of state and political structures.’ Thatcongress reportedly adopted a provisional status regulating the activities ofaksakal courts, whereby they were given responsibility for examining cases ofadministrative violations; property, family and other disputes; and minor crimespassed to them by state procurators. The President is reported to have signed adecree approving this statute on 25 January 1995 . . . Furthermore, AmnestyInternational is concerned about allegations that extra-legal militias operatingunder the authority of aksakal courts have subjected people to illegal detentionand ill-treatment and have administered punishments handed down by aksakalcourts, including whipping and stoning.

(Amnesty International 1996: 5)

The overall effect of tribalism increases the authority of Kyrgyz men, particu-larly older men, within the home, community and country. The increasingstrength of the aksakal courts and their choro render it difficult for womento challenge male dominance in any aspect of life, including an unwantedkidnapping. In this sense, tribalism is understood as an example of howhegemonic masculinity operating within a patriarchal structure provides a‘successful strategy for the subordination of women’ (Connell 1993: 603). Theelement of tribalism in relation to women’s lives in Kyrgyzstan also explainsConnell’s verification that the

state and clan as well as family patriarchs . . . [define the code of conduct] formen not as pursuits of a unitary ideal of masculinity, but more centrally interms of the right or wrong performance of a network of obligations – towardsemperor, parents, brothers, etc.

(Connell 1993: 604)


As the results of this research demonstrate, a ‘network of obligations’ appearsto play a significant role in kidnapping.

This brief overview of Kyrgyz history since independence (1991–2003)demonstrates the constant pressure on women to conform to various aspectsof new, male defined, identities that are in competition for dominant socio-political power. The increased reports of female slavery (sharoo), prostitution,trafficking in women, rapes, gang rapes, murders, bride-kidnapping, sexualand domestic violence and extreme poverty are indicative of a society inturmoil, with conflicts of gender (as defined by each competing socio-politicalidentity) and, hence, women situated at the centre of the crisis. Conflictingmale definitions of ethnicities and their gendered identities are resulting inextremely high levels of violence against women, of which kidnappingrepresents only one aspect (Kuehnast and Green 1997: 39; Karasaeva 1998;United Nations 1999).11

METHODOLOGY

Research Cycle and Design

The research design of this study used mixed methods and triangulationacross all stages, ensuring a high degree of validity for the resulting data andanalysis (Tashakkori and Teddlie 1998: 20–39). Inductive reasoning and logic,with emphasis on grounded theory, began the research cycle when kidnappingemerged as an issue over a two-year period of persistent and deep observation.During the researcher’s doctoral interviews and daily life in Kyrgyzstan,kidnapping surfaced as a constant concern for many Kyrgyz women. Addi-tional to the frequency, was the intensity of fear women expressed. One ofthe researcher’s research assistants, a woman of 18, was so concerned aboutthe potential of being kidnapped that the researcher had to make a formalcommitment to her parents that she would ensure the assistant’s safety.

A sense of female cohesion across ethnic, racial, religious, national lines,based on the common gender oppression of patriarchy is a constant themeand tension in feminist theory and practice. Feminists often explore this issuethrough complex analysis of patriarchy, and often accompanying misogyny,contextualized against political, social and economic factors, all of whichserve to affirm, reaffirm and reinforce patriarchy. However, this researcherfound that women in Kyrgyzstan, with none of the social science tools socommon to western feminist academic/activists, began with the assumptionof patriarchy and consequently female empathy. Contrary to perceptions alsoprevalent in women in development theory/practice, the women the researcherlived among in Kyrgyzstan did not need to be ‘empowered’ to understandhow their lives were constricted by patriarchy. They were acutely aware ofwhat ‘being a woman’ meant. Although coping skills differed from womanto woman, just like women in the developed world, women in Kyrgyzstan


were making a hundred conscious and unconscious ‘bargains with patriarchy’every day (Kandiyoti 1998). As a participant observer the researcher was ableto bridge the ‘ethnic’ gap, between white and Asian, western and eastern, andrelate to Kyrgyz women as women. It mattered far less to the Kyrgyz womenthat the researcher was a white, western woman and far more that she was awoman. Gender became a primary shared identity as small, often family-networked groups of women, again and again, invited the researcher intotheir kitchens to ‘talk about men’. ‘Men were men’ and therefore otheridentities mattered less because women’s lives are primarily shaped by thesubordination of being women. The approach made towards the researcherby women in Kyrgyzstan centred on this shared assumption – because theresearcher was a woman she would understand the commonality of being the‘second sex’ that runs through all women’s lives.

This shared assumption allowed the researcher to be privy to discussionsand fears on the subject of kidnapping, which seemed to warrant research.The researcher wrote a number of articles on kidnapping examining issues ofinternational human rights law, non-governmental advocacy prescription andkidnapping from a Kyrgyz women’s perspective. But all of these researchprojects lacked a crucial element, why did men kidnap? What were theythinking about when they kidnapped? Were they always drunk? Did theyever kidnap alone? Did they notice and/or care if the woman did not want tobe kidnapped? Was rape common to the act? How did men feel about rape?Was it really only Kyrgyz men who kidnapped or did other ethnic groupsalso participate in kidnapping? The researcher’s own work, on ethnicity andidentity, provides some clues to these questions; however, questions aboutmale viewpoints related to ethnic identity, violence and bride-kidnappingwere, largely, unanswered. In order fully to examine kidnapping from agender-based theoretical perspective, male reaction needed to be explored.Thus, a hypothetical generalization, supported by grounded theoretical use offeminism, was devised that posited kidnapping as an example of genderedethnic structuring. A confirmatory investigation, with this prior hypothesisto be tested by deductive reasoning, was then formed.

Measurement Tool

Structured, funnel quantitative interviews were created as a measurementinstrument that might confirm or refute this generalization. Self-reportingtechniques, asking for information about experiences and sociometry, askingabout relationships, were used in the survey design. Participant reactivity (toa white, western, female) was an important concern. As a woman, theresearcher had extensive opportunities to discuss, in-depth, issues of identity,violence and kidnapping with women; however, discussions about sex andviolence with men were culturally off-limits. Thus, the researcher trainedKumar Bekbolotov, a male Kyrgyz student at the American University in


Kyrgyzstan, where she was teaching at the time, to work as her researchassistant and conduct the male interviews. This significantly reduced datacollection error due to participant reactivity.

In addition to standard socio-economic/political and demographic variables(such as age, education level, profession/job, ethnicity and region) the mea-surement instrument was developed, with Kumar’s assistance as well as theassistance of a core group of close Kyrgyz friends (both female and male), toinclude a set of questions that might begin to probe kidnapping from a maleperspective. The resulting instrument was tuned for cultural sensitivities, suchas changing direct questions like rape, to a more indirect, ‘did you have sexwith the woman you kidnapped? If yes, when and how?’ Judgement validity,through peer debriefing, was performed on the measurement tool before datacollection began to ensure the instrument was measuring what it intended tomeasure. After asking demographic questions, the final measurement toolasked the following questions in the following order:

Ω Have you ever kidnapped a bride for yourself or helped a friend?Ω How old were you when you kidnapped?Ω Why did you kidnap?Ω Did you do so alone or with friends?Ω Was vodka or other alcohol involved? If so, how much?Ω Why did you or did you not drink before/during the kidnapping?Ω Was the girl/woman a stranger?Ω If you knew her – for how long and how did you know her?Ω Why did you select the girl/woman you did for kidnapping?Ω Was there force involved or did the girl/woman come willing?Ω If there was force, what kind? How?Ω Do you think the girl/woman wanted to be kidnapped?Ω Did the girl/woman seem scared, upset, happy, excited or otherwise?Ω How did you feel when the kidnapping took place?Ω If the girl/woman seemed upset, scared, sad, did this bother you?Ω Do you think kidnapping is positive, negative or neutral for society? Why?Ω Did you have sex with the woman you kidnapped? If yes, when and how?Ω Should women be allowed to kidnap?Ω Would you change your decision to kidnap or would you do the same

again?Ω How long have you been married to the woman you kidnapped?Ω Are you satisfied with the state of your marriage?

Sample Size

Stratified random sampling was chosen as the data collection design, sincethe research was concerned with the male half of the population. Randomselection was performed from the sub-strata, in this case the total male


population of the country. The design was careful to avoid selection bias bytaking extra measures to ensure a representative population, such as samplingbased on population percentage by region, avoiding pre-selection of class,age, ethnicity, education or profession by sampling in the outdoor marketswhere people of all micro-political and economic identities mix. This alsoassured urban/rural diversity as Bishkek, the capital, and Osh, the largestSouthern city, are the only true urban areas in Kyrgyzstan. The rest of thepopulation is considered rural.

A larger than needed sample was taken as a final precaution to ensurepopulation external validity. The required number is 383 (based on the entirepopulation of Kyrgyzstan 4,856,200 as determined by the 1999 Kyrgyzgovernment census)12 necessary for statistical significance of the entire, maleand female population.13 Based on standard worldwide demographics of non-conflict zones, the male population of Kyrgyzstan is estimated to be justabout half of the entire population. This estimation is confirmed by theKyrgyz National Statistics Committee publication (Itar-Tass 1999) citing2,375,000 men and 2,481,000 women in the total population. Therefore 192,rather than 383, would have met the demand for statistical significance.Because there was an importance placed on the ethnic aspect of kidnapping(one of the goals was to use the survey instrument to isolate ethnicity as avariable in order to determine if the perception of kidnapping as an ‘Kyrgyzethnic act’ was authentic) it was decided in advance that interviewing a trulyrandom sample of ethnically diverse men, rather than interviewing 192 ethnicKyrgyz men, was an important objective.

Any ‘pre-selection’ of ethnicity would have invalidated the random sam-pling method as well as produced tainted results. Because there was nomethod of determining how many men would claim to have been involvedin kidnapping, rather than interview only 192 men, 383 (the statisticallysignificant number for the entire population) random male samples weretaken with the hope that the excess number would compensate for the numberof surveys that would be incomplete if non-ethnic men did not claim tokidnap. The resulting sample size of men who either kidnapped or participatedin a kidnapping was 176 out of 383, just shy of the preferable 192. The 176responses form the bulk of quantitative results of this research.

Limitations

The desire to prove a, heretofore, assumed link between ethnicity andkidnapping did mean a slight reduction in the final number of those whoclaimed to kidnap coming in at 176, just 16 interviews under the estimated192 for statistical significance. None the less, while this quantitative analysislacks total statistical stability, the results remain significant because they aretriangulated against the researcher’s qualitative evidence that suggested thequantitative results are representative of the population at large. Moreover, as


this is the first known statistical research conducted on men and kidnapping, itrepresents a foundation for future research.

All of the questions, but one, received sufficient and reliable responses.The exception was the question about sex. Since many women had claimedthat they, or their friends, were raped during the process of kidnapping, theresearcher wanted to explore how many men would indicate that rapeoccurred. Despite precautions against participant reactivity, the question ofsexual activity, anticipated to have a high error rate due to participantreaction, not surprisingly did have a high no response/error rate. The resultsof the question were largely indeterminate. Age and privacy issues weredetermined to be factors. Kumar is a young man and it is considereddisrespectful for a young man to inquire about sex of an elder. Additionally,asking a stranger about sexual relations with his partner in any culture might,understandably, warrant the same no-response/error rate, since this is aprivate issue.

Data Processing, Analysis, Validity

Too often, in feminist research, a dominant, feminist, western discourseuncritically reproduces its own understanding of women’s identity and needs.As Anne Marie Goetz describes the problem, ‘. . . Western discourse aboutdevelopment that has reserved for itself the authority to define and name itsepistemological categories: ‘‘progress’’ ‘‘modernization’’ and its objects: ‘‘thirdworld’’ and ‘‘third world women’’. Western feminists have been guilty ofextrapolating from and projecting a privileged identity as a referent for therest of the world’ (Goetz 1991: 133). In order to avoid ‘projecting’ a westernconcept of marriage and gender roles onto this research, the data wereprocessed and analysed jointly by the researcher and a Kyrgyz femalecolleague, Salta Sulaimanova. Thus, the survey was vetted by ethnic Kyrgyzmen and women during the developmental phase, was implemented by aKyrgyz male and the resulting data were cleaned, categorized and analysedby an American-Kyrgyz team. Both the triangulation as well as the cross-cultural sensitivity embedded in every phase of this research serve as validitychecks providing enhanced credibility to the research results.

Parallel mixed data analysis was performed on the resulting data. Pearsoncorrelation was used to determine quantitative measurements of relationshipsbetween variables and chi-square tests of independence/association were alsoused during the quantitative bivariate analysis (Tashakkori and Teddlie 1998).Analysis of the data used quantitative results against grounded theory ofinductive reasoning based on both non-structured observation as well astriangulation of feminist theory in order to provide transferability of results.Internal validity of the quantitative analysis was checked by qualitativeinference checks including prolonged engagement, persistent observation, useof triangulation, peer debriefing and member checks from the same social


grouping that was studied. After analysing the data an inferential consistencyaudit was run on the results to confirm: the degree of theoretical andconceptual plausibility for explanations of relationships between variables(explanation credibility); the degree to which conceptual frameworks trans-lated into elements of design (translation fidelity); appropriate samplingmethods; and the degree to which expected results occurred (predictivevalidity). A credibility results audit was preformed, with the results of thisresearch being highly consistent with previous findings on masculinities infeminist research (Tashakkori and Teddlie 1998: 63–6).

RESEARCH RESULTS

Ethnicity

It was predicated that ethnicity and kidnapping would have a strong correla-tion and this proved true. Kidnapping is perceived as Kyrgyz male behaviour.The research confirmed a strong correlation between those who kidnappedand Kyrgyz ethnicity with 100 per cent of those interviewed that hadkidnapped, or been involved in kidnapping, ethnically Kyrgyz. Zero per centof other ethnicities interviewed kidnapped or were involved in kidnapping.

Education and Kidnapping

The correlation between use of force, kidnapping a stranger and excessivedrinking cut across socio-economic lines. Although it might be assumed thatthose with a higher education would be less likely to drink excessively, useforce and kidnap a stranger, the results found that neither education levelnor profession made any difference to whether a man was more or less likelyto kidnap a stranger, use force or drink excessively.

In fact, those holding a secondary education, or less, were nearly twice aslikely not to drink at all compared with those with higher education. Thosewho drank excessively were as likely to have higher education as not. Whenasked why they did not drink, 34 per cent of those with secondary education,or less, said they did not drink at all because it was ‘shameful, a bad idea,irresponsible, etc.’ Only 14 per cent of those with higher education said thesame thing. When asked, ‘Why did you or did you not drink?’ those whodrank because it was ‘part of the tradition’ or for ‘courage, confidence, or tobe brave’ were more likely to hold a secondary, or less, education.

There was a strong correlation between education level and age of kidnap-ping. Those who kidnapped between the ages of 18–24 were far more likelyto have only a secondary, or lower, education level. Those who kidnappedfrom 24-plus were far more likely to have higher education. The age bracketwhen men were most likely to kidnap is 21–25. For those with secondary


education, or less, the optimum age was 21 and those with higher educationthe optimum age was 25. This may have to do with men waiting until theyhave finished school before they kidnap.

There was also a correlation between education levels and how men viewedthe practice of kidnapping; positive, negative or neutral. A cross-tabulationrevealed that 41 per cent of all men thought kidnapping to be a positiveactivity. Of those who thought kidnapping is positive, 72 per cent had asecondary, or less, education. A total of 32 per cent of all men thoughtkidnapping to be ‘barbaric, illegal, violated human rights of women’, orotherwise a negative activity. Of those who thought kidnapping was a negativeactivity, 17 per cent had a secondary or less education.

Vodka and Violence

The results provided a clear link between kidnapping and alcohol use, withover half of those who kidnapped reporting drinking; 32 per cent drankmoderate amounts and 19 per cent drank excessively, a surprising 47 percent reported not drinking at all. Excessively is defined as three–four men,drinking three or more one-litre bottles of vodka and moderately is definedas three or less bottles of vodka, which in western culture would place all 51per cent drinking heavily.

The results provided a clear correlation between the use of physical forceto kidnap and vodka drinking. Those men who used physical force to kidnap(i.e. ‘dragged the woman down the street, dragged her into the car, broke herhands, beat her, or covered her mouth and head’, among other responsesprovided) were more likely to drink excessive amounts of vodka than thosewho kidnapped without the use of force.

The correlation between force and vodka drinking extended to those whokidnapped a woman they did not know. In total, 35 per cent of all kidnappingswere those of strangers. Those who kidnapped an unsuspecting and unknownwoman were more likely to drink excessively and use force. Those men whokidnapped a woman they knew well and, in many cases, were already dating,were less likely to use force and less likely to drink excessively. Indeed, thosewho did not drink at all were twice as likely not to use force to kidnap.

There was also a strong correlation between responses to the question ‘Whydid you kidnap?’ and vodka drinking. In order to determine the details of thiscorrelation a cross-tabulation revealed that none of those who kidnapped ‘forlove’, usually indicating elopement rather than authentic kidnapping, drankexcessively. Of those who kidnapped due to family pressure, half did notdrink at all and 33 per cent drank ceremonially. Those who kidnapped for‘manhood’ and ‘tradition’ were as likely to drink excessively as not.

The respondents were also asked, ‘Why did you or did you not drink?’ The20 per cent who drank a great deal of vodka were more likely to claim theydid so for courage, confidence or as part of the tradition. The 32 per cent


who drank a little were also likely to claim they drank for courage, confidenceor as part of the tradition. Those that did not drink at all claimed they rejectedvodka because it was a ‘shameful, negative thing to do, or a bad idea’.

Issues of Force

In order to probe more deeply into use of force, men who kidnapped wereasked a series of questions regarding how they felt during the kidnappingand how they perceived the woman felt. If the men indicated that theythought the woman was ‘upset’ and did not wish to be kidnapped, they werethen asked a follow-up question: ‘If the girl/woman seemed upset, scared,sad, did this bother you?’ When asked how the men felt, in general, aboutthe kidnapping, 42 per cent said they were generally afraid, ashamed or upsetabout kidnapping a woman; 11 per cent said they felt brave, macho or strong;23 per cent felt passive or neutral; 15 per cent felt happy; 2 per cent felt‘drunk’; 6 per cent did not know how they felt. When cross-tabulated againstthe question of how the men perceived the woman felt, 30 per cent of themen who said they were generally upset, ashamed or afraid also claimed thatthe woman was angry, upset or scared; 65 per cent, who felt brave, macho orstrong, thought the woman was scared, angry or upset; 44 per cent who werehappy said the woman was upset, angry or scared.

A correlation appeared between the responses to questions of use of forceand the question, ‘How did the woman appear to feel?’ The relationshipbetween physical force and angry, upset or scared women was evident whena cross-tabulation revealed that of 176 women kidnapped, 61 per centappeared to the men to be ‘upset, angry or scared’; 12 per cent of the mendid not know how the woman felt; and 10 per cent of the men claimed thewoman was ‘happy’. Of those 61 per cent upset, angry or scared women, 33per cent were victims of force. In response to the question, ‘If the womanseemed upset, did this bother you?’ 73 per cent were not bothered, no matterhow the woman felt.

Quality of Marriage

Finally, the men were asked about the length and quality of their marriage.A correlation appeared between kidnapped women who were strangers andthe length and quality of the marriage. The cross-tabulation revealed thatwomen who were not strangers, and therefore more likely to have beenengaged in eloping rather than an authentic kidnapping, were far more likelyto have a longer marriage. Those with a longer marriage were more likely tosay they were satisfied with the state of their marriage. In all, 84 per centwho responded that they were satisfied with their marriage did not ‘kidnap’a stranger. Only 6 per cent who reported being satisfied with their marriage


had kidnapped a stranger. Of those who were satisfied with the state of theirmarriage, 71 per cent had been married for four or more years.

KIDNAPPING: AN ACT OF MALE ETHNIC DEFINITION

The results of this research indicate that ethnic creation has a significantgender component, at least in the case of Kyrgyz ethnicity. A feministtheoretical framework provides generality to the results of this research, aswell as to emerging research in the gendering ethnicity field. Feminists, fromCatherine MacKinnon (1989) to Sue Lees (1996), have established violenceagainst women by men as, most often, performed in intimate settings, suchas the home, and in intimate relations, with husband/father/uncle. In thissense kidnapping is little different than marital rape in England or the USA.The technicalities of the resulting gender-based identity violence may bedifferent but the impact on women’s lives is the same: ‘violence and thethreat of violence are used by men to control women – either to enforce theirwill or punish women for perceived transgressions’ (Hester 1996: 28).

When the results of kidnapping are examined within the theoreticalframework of feminist research on sexual violence, these results can also begeneralized against the established knowledge that ‘sexual violence . . . [is] akey element in male power over and control of women’ (Hester et al. 1996:3). In other words, kidnapping is one of many forms of hegemonic masculinity.Specifically, kidnapping seems to symbolize the male act of ‘claiming’ one’sethnicity while women, of the same ethnic group, ‘belong’ to the ethnicity bysubmission to male ethnic dominance. Through submission women may besignifying sacrifice of individuality to ethnic community, demonstratingloyalty to the ethnicity. Without female compliance in kidnapping, Kyrgyzmen would not be able to accomplish, what appears to be, a highly importantethnic right of passage. Kidnapping also illustrates definition of ethnicitythrough male violence and dominance in ‘hunting’, ‘capturing’ and coercingwomen to submit to the ethnic fraternity, a subset of ethnic patriarchy. Sincekidnapping appears to only be performed by groups of ethnically similarmale friends and relatives, it can be considered an ethnic fraternal act.

If kidnapping is an act of ethnic definition, then a woman who rejectskidnapping is seen to be rejecting not only a Kyrgyz tradition but also Kyrgyzethnicity. If men are to remain in control of their ethnic identity, controlmust originate at the very start of ethnic adulthood, symbolized by the act ofmarriage, in this case through kidnapping. Thus kidnapping exemplifies bothactive and passive gender roles used to define and control ethnicity. It alsodenotes ‘ownership’ that ethnic men believe to be theirs over their ethnicwomen. Kyrgyz men act upon this belief, that they have the right to ‘own’(through forced marriage) any Kyrgyz woman of their choice, when theyperform the act of kidnapping a stranger. This unspoken assumption, articu-lated through the act of kidnapping, provides evidence as to how men view


the women of their own ethnic group – as collective ethnic property. Women –and their reproductive capacity as noted by Yuval-Davis and Anthias (1989) –should be available for any member of the ethnic collective who desires awife and mother for his children. Feminist theory supports this understandingas masculinity is defined ‘through the various forms of power men canunthinkingly take for granted: the power to exert control over women’ (Segal1993: 635). Kidnapping thus defines ‘manhood’ in an ethnic context.

The duality that Segal explores, male sexual dominance and female sexualcompliance, is also evident in the results of this research on kidnapping.Equally important is the ethnic-group social pressure on individual womento conform, which evidences ‘men’s sexual coerciveness towards women[that] has been socially tolerated, often, indeed, both expected and encour-aged’ (Segal 1990: 211). Relevant to a gendered understanding of ethnicproduction, Segal confirms that the

power and meaning of ‘masculinity’ derive not just from autonomy, or familialinteraction, nor indeed from any fixed set of attributes that all men share, butfrom wider social relations. The concept of ‘masculinity’ condenses, above all,the cultural reality of women’s subordination. This reality is embodied . . . inthe daily functioning – the routines and rituals’

(1993: 629)

In this research, kidnapping is then understood as the cultural reality ofKyrgyz female subordination to ethnic ritual embedded in patriarchal dailylife of home, community, ethnicity and state.

The feminist work completed on masculinities aids in understanding theresult of male violence directed against women, be it in the form of bride-kidnapping, dowry burning otherwise known as bride-burning primarily donein India, marital rape, domestic violence, incest or sexual harassment in thework place. The specific means of using patriarchy to establish control overwomen may change from country to country but women suffering from maleviolence, control and power share a universal experience of: abuse, fear,invalidation of experience, marginalization and restriction of choice, voiceand role, a reduction in human capacity, denial, complicity and rationaliza-tion. Connell reminds us that dimensions of social power, distribution ofpower, institutional organization of gender and the structuring of genderproduction all play important roles in defining masculinity (Connell 1993:599). Masculinity, while produced in interpersonal transactions like kidnap-ping, as ‘a personal practice cannot be isolated from its institutional context’(Connell 1993: 602). Through kidnapping Kyrgyz men demonstrate not onlyan adherence to ‘Kyrgyz tradition’ but an ability to dominate Kyrgyz women.This, in a sense, is ‘claiming’ a place as an ethnic adult male – a decision-maker with the ability to decide any Kyrgyz woman’s fate though forcedmarriage. Kidnapping, most clearly, then represents power – male powerand specifically male ethnic power. Power, as the results of this research


demonstrate, is leveraged through physical force, violence, a fraternity of thekidnapper’s closest male friends and relatives and vodka. Violence, fraternity,alcohol and dominance appear to be central ingredients in ethnic manhood.Ethnic production then is clearly interlinked with concepts of masculinity, asunderstood through feminist theory.

Class is an important variable that has bearing in this research. Collegeeducated Kyrgyz men are considered elite, within Kyrgyzstan, and are,therefore, likely to become national and community leaders setting policy,defining problems and assessing culpability. Too often, elite members ofsociety prefer to place blame on those who do not have access to power –those without a voice. Contrary to popular belief expressed in a prevalentperception that educated, wealthy, elites are different from/better than thepoor, uneducated, rural population; the combination of force, fraternity andvodka was not linked to ‘lower’ class men. The results of this research foundthat it was elite Kyrgyz men, future leaders, who were more likely than thefuture manual labourers to drink excessively and use violent force to kidnapa woman. Kyrgyz men with a high school degree, or less, were more likely,than college educated men, not to drink at all.

Remarkably, Goldstein’s (2001) research on ‘the making of militarizedmasculinity’ provides striking parallels between societal construction ofmanhood and military action and manhood and bride-kidnapping. Goldstein(2001: 290–1) discusses how men are socialized for aggression as well as thetest of manhood being ‘a motivation to fight’. He discusses the role thatalcohol has played, throughout history, when men go to war. Alcohol,Goldstein (2001: 257) asserts, serves to suppress fear, reward effort and‘overcome social inhibitions regarding aggressive violence’. Goldstein (2001:264) discovered that ‘culture after culture features rites of passage fromboyhood to manhood’ and he noted how often this focused on conquer andconquest. Men in war, Goldstein (2001: 266–7) says, talk of ‘physical courage’and ‘suppressing emotion’. Men, operating in a fraternity, use shame whenone man fails to perform the prescribed ‘manly activities’. Shame, saysGoldstein (2001: 266–9, 356), is ‘the glue that holds the man-making processtogether’. Finally, Goldstein’s (2001: 363) comprehensive research on genderand war noted, what many feminist researchers before him have asserted,that ‘rape [is] . . . an instrument of territorial control and domination’.

In this research on kidnapping, men expressed kidnapping as a ‘test ofmanhood’ – being able to fight for a woman through force of kidnapping.Kidnappers never went alone. They always relied on a fraternity of malefriends and relatives, explaining they needed the ‘support’. Shame, as such,was not mentioned but is inferred when Kyrgyz men said their friends wouldensure they would not back out of, what Goldstein calls, the ‘manly activity’.A fraternity also indicates a similar socialization of aggression. In kidnapping,as Goldstein noted in war, alcohol suppressed fear and rewarded effort.Respondents cited drinking vodka as a means to overcome fear, gain ‘courage’and steel oneself for the act of kidnapping, or as a means of celebrating


victory, manhood and accomplishing the act. When respondents were askedhow they felt about the kidnapping, they expressed both elements of Goldste-in’s physical courage as well as a suppression of emotion – their own as wellas a denial of the emotion of the woman being kidnapped. Finally, althoughno one admitted to rape, from the researcher’s experience with women whohave been kidnapped, rape in kidnapping, as in war, appears to be fairlycommon to the process of male control and domination over women.

Transversalism also substantiates that the tools of patriarchy may bedifferent but the intentions and the results are the same. Feminists whoengage in such research should not be side-tracked by cultural manifestationsof patriarchy – however bizarre one particular act may seem, like kidnapping,but must focus on the dominant paradigm common to all women. AsMacKinnon affirms,

inequality because of sex defines and situates women as women. If the sexeswere equal, women would not be sexually subjected. Sexual force would beexceptional, consent to sex could be commonly real . . . women would not beeconomically subjected, their desperation and marginality cultivated, theirenforced dependency exploited sexually or economically.

(1989: 215)

While women in England or the United States may not fear being bride-kidnapped, they do suffer the same dynamics from issues of male dominanceand the link to violent subjection of women.

GIVING VOICE TO FUTURE RESEARCH

Much has been made of recording women’s voices, with the theory thatvalidation is critical to women’s lives as well as to feminist theory, so longleft outside the realm of ‘knowledge’ by enlightenment positivists. Hesterreminds that ‘giving voice’ to women ‘is only a first step in challengingexisting ideas, policies, and practices’ (Hester et al. 1996: 4). After having‘given voice’ to Kyrgyz women’s experiences with bride-kidnapping in aseries of four articles on the subject, the author became concerned that onlyrecording and analysing half the equation was occurring. Indeed, the authorwas falling into the trap that has plagued feminism since its inception – thata focus exclusively on women implies, directly or indirectly, that it is womenwho are at fault, women who need to change their behaviour. To examinewomen outside of the social context of patriarchy provides little explanationfor female subjugation. In this sense male behaviour is still perceived as thenorm and female behaviour is perceived as a reaction to male behaviour. Isn’tit male behaviour that is aberrant where violence is concerned? Shouldn’tfeminist theory/practice be pre-occupied with understanding and then influ-encing the links between male dominance, power and violence? Yet, there


the author was, a feminist researcher, examining female reaction to bride-kidnapping, creating ‘prescriptive measures’ the international and nationalcommunity could take to reduce kidnapping by focusing on female behaviour.What did the author know of those that perpetrated this violence? Nothing.She had only researched and understood how women reacted to the abuse. Ifmen are the perpetrators of this action, and the goal of feminist praxis is torender women’s lives more secure, isn’t the root cause of the violence, in thiscase kidnapping, rather than the reaction to the act, what demands to bestudied?

It is essential that research be conducted on gendered, both male andfemale, aspects of ethnic creation and definition, which heretofore, have beenlargely understood to be gender neutral. The gendered constructs of ethnicityare both clear and consequential since this knowledge assists in explainingthe ‘fraternal’ and violent aspect of ethnicity (Allen 1998: 59).14 If fraternitycan only be maintained outside the home by groups of men, then the ‘selfless,communal experience of brotherhood, which is the model of civic virtue, isunsustainable’ without war (Benton 1998: 43), without domination of women,without patriarchal power and institutions and without ethnic acts of defini-tion, like kidnapping. It must be recognized that women, themselves, areserving as ethnic boundary markers and it must be understood what thismeans in the lives of women, men and children.

As Cockburn (1998: 43) notes, Bosnian women know ‘how extreme nationalmovements transfix women as living boundary-markers’. Nationalism isethnically derived and is defined ‘as something that runs in the blood, thenit necessarily involves a tight control of women’s sexuality in order to defineand maintain the boundaries of the ethnic community’ (Charles and Hintjens1998: 6). Therefore, male control of the female is essential because the femaleprovides a distinct location within the ethnic collective. Female inclusion inthe group is, however, dependent on how the male leaders decide to symbolizethe ethnic (Charles and Hintjens 1998: 6). Male control of women’s sexualityand reproductive capacity appears to be both an integral component ofethnicity not only during conflict by enemy ‘others’ but also internally to theethnic group in times of ethnic building/recreation (Yuval-Davis and Anthias1989). Ethnic violence, in the case of kidnapping, is sexual and is directedinward and committed against the female ‘self ’ when male community leaders‘mark’ and/or ‘protect’ their boundary markers. In this way, gender, andparticularly male control of the female gender, is understood to be a prominentethnic boundary marker.

Why has there been so much silence within the academy on the linksbetween ethnicity and gender? Feminist theory claims ‘men, who as theperpetrators of sexual violence have a vested interest in women’s silence,have, in a range of ways and in a range of contexts, constructed ‘‘knowledge’’about sexual violence, crime, and women’s sexuality’ (Kelly and Radford1996: 20). This is clear in the case of kidnapping since this is the first knownresearch to probe the linkages between male sexual violence against women


within the context of ethnic creation in Kyrgyzstan. Feminist theory hasalready established:

the linkage of power, violence, and sexuality has been one of the foundationsof feminist analysis of male dominance; we have argued that, as in otherpolitical systems, men’s gender power is ultimately backed by force, that forceis used when power is in jeopardy. Hence sexual violence is the outcome ofmen’s power as men and women’s resistance to it.

(Kelly 1996: 37)

Feminist frameworks, such as this, can be used for future research on genderand ethnicity to explain both the resistance to such research within andwithout the academy, as both academic and policy circles, globally, are stilldominated by male decision makers who may be reluctant to examine theirown complicity with, or negligence of, considering the power of patriarchyas relevant. Radford and Stanko (1996: 69) assert that the reluctance of themajority to engage seriously with gender as a variable in important socio-political and economic topics, such as ethnicity, stems from an inability toidentify ‘male sexual violence as part of the backdrop of women’s lives . . .[and rather] identify it as something that affects only a minority of women,who can then be held in some way responsible for it’.

CONCLUSION

The importance of private and public in relation to feminism and women’sexclusion from the formal political process of the state and, hence citizenship,is well established.15 The results of this research provide some understandingthat ethnic identity also appears to embody a gendered public/private dividethat similarly serves to restrict and control the female gender. As citizenshipimplies representative belonging, so does ethnic identity. Ethnicity, likecitizenship, appears to have origins in the brotherhood of male conflict andconquer not only of the ethnic ‘other’ male and female but also of one’s ownethnic female; as in the case of kidnapping. Too often research on theintersections of ethnicity and gender focuses on male violence against ethnic‘other’ women or men, while the broader context of how ethnicity andgender intersect within the ethnic community are ignored. These relativelyunexamined aspects of ethnicity and gender remain a vital academic projectto be undertaken not only within feminist circles but also within wideracademic circles of ethnic/nationalist studies and international relations.

When examining gender and ethnicity feminist researchers must take theproject beyond women and ethnicity for if we feminists limit our work toexamining only women then we are limiting feminist theory ‘the way sexismlimits women’s lives: to a response to terms men set’ (MacKinnon 1989: 128).The research presented in this article has been an attempt to correct the


imbalance set by previous research on kidnapping, by this researcher, whichonly examined women’s reaction to kidnapping. Feminist research must be,as Connell contests, also concerned with how to change oppressive genderroles. The knowledge objective must also include ‘men’s places and practicesin gender relations’ (Connell 1993: 600, 601).

This research has endeavoured to explore links between ethnic manhoodand violence against women, with a view that a more complete ontologicalapproach might assist in understanding and changing oppressive genderroles. While many young women around the world, if asked, might not listamong their daily concerns the possibility of being kidnapped, womeneverywhere are affected by male violence or the threat of male violence. Ifwe, the global community, ever hope to reduce both ethnic violence and maleviolence, against women and men, the academy must begin to dissect, andreject, male acts of ethnic adulthood that centre around violent shows offorce. In the Kyrgyz community this begins with kidnapping. What does itstart with in your community?

Lori Handrahan2427 Tunlaw Rd NW

Washington DC 20007, USAE-mail: [email protected]

Notes

1 Generally anywhere between 16 and 26, constitutes ‘young’ for women inKyrgyzstan.

2 Ethnicity in the former Soviet Union (FSU) is a complex variable, shaped by aSoviet definition and manipulation of ethnicity, completely different from westernunderstandings. The scope of this research article does not allow adequatecontextualization of Kyrgyz ethnicity emerging out of Soviet history as it is thetask of this research to examine gender dimensions of ethnicity in terms of howKyrgyz ethnicity is currently being created, re-created and reinforced. For a moredetailed contextualization of Kyrgyz ethnicity and Soviet history please refer tothe author’s work on this subject in Handrahan (2002: 25–8). Additionally Shanin(1989); Diuk (1990); Brubaker (1994); Slezkine (1996); Humphrey (2002); andMandel and Humphrey (2002) provide excellent material on this subject.

3 See Handrahan (2000a, 2000b, 2000c).4 Indicated, for example, by Ethnicity: The Oxford Reader, which consists of 422

pages of which only six are devoted to gender (Hutchinson and Smith 1996).5 Hester et al. (1996), the outcome of a 1985 British Sociological Association

conference, ‘War, Violence, and Social Change’.6 In other words, female genital mutilation is as horrifying as bulimia and anorexia

and both are a result of patriarchal oppression (Neuwirth 2001; Suzumi Young2002; Pollack 2003).


7 Of 100 members of the Jogorku Kenesh, Kyrgyz parliament, only five are women(Huskey 1997). Polygamy narrowly lost a vote in the Jogorku Kenesh to make itlegal in the early 1990s; however, the parliament has no records of past votes.Magzimov Jenish Mamyrakashevich, Jogorku Kenesh staff member, Expert ofGovernment Committee on Law-Making, confirmed that the debate took placeand that except for one to six votes (he could not remember exactly) polygamywould have been legal (Handrahan 1999).

8 The ‘new’ tribalism post-Soviet Union, while providing a fair amount of personalstability in the current crisis environment (i.e. little to no state governance orgovernment), this stability only exists for select ethnic groups, primarily Kyrgyzor other groups indigenous to the region such as Uighers, Tajiks and Uzbeks, whocan benefit from extended clan structures. However, this type of extended familyrule is highly alienating to other groups of Kyrgyz citizens who were moved tothe region under the Soviet Union, including Koreans, Germans, Jews, Ukrainians,Latvians, Ethiopians, Nigerians, Russians, etc. These so-called ‘European’ minori-ties have no nomadic past and no ‘tribal lines’ to rely on for support and havebecome increasingly frustrated by living in a country that is governed by tribalrelations. In this manner, tribalism increases ethnic friction and the potential ofethnic conflict.

9 President Akaev’s speech to members of aksakal courts as printed in a Kyrgyzpaper (UTRO BISHKEKA 8 May 1999: 2).

10 ‘Local elders’ courts have committed a number of abuses . . . torture is sometimesused to extract confessions’ (US Department of State 1997: Section 1, para e).

11 Violence against women has become so extreme that the UN issued a reportwarning the Government to address this issue.

In the face of widespread violence against Kyrgyz women – includingdomestic violence, gang rape, and systematic assault and battery – expertmembers of the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination againstWomen . . . urged Kyrgyzstan to re-evaluate its programs and policies . . .astonished at the rise in the number of vicious crimes against women, theypressed the Government to identify the root causes of that grave phenomenonand devise ways to suppress it.

(United Nations 1999: 1)

A caution should be made at this point about what Carley calls the murkinessof Central Asia, paradoxical and confusing information when placed in a westernframework. Central Asia, Carley rightly says and I strongly underline, exhibitsmany ambiguous determinants with very few absolutes (Carley 1995: 293). So,for example, despite the alarming data on violence against women ‘during thetransition, female enrolment in higher education has risen from 55% to 66% ofall students’ (Kuehnast and Green 1997: 39). If a researcher were to read onlyabout female education, one might conclude, erroneously that the rise in femaleeducation correlates with an increase in quality of life and status for women. Yet,in Kyrgyzstan, the opposite is occurring providing an aberrant case to decades of


research on women and development, which suggests that female education isone of the best indicators of female quality of life. See, for example, the UnitedNations’ Gender Empowerment Measure (GEM) and Gender Related DevelopmentIndex (GDI) (United Nations Development Programme 1995). This Kyrgyz contra-diction should be investigated in a future study.

12 This research used the most accurate population breakdown available at the time.The government census can be found at the Kyrgyz National Statistic Commissionhttp://stat-gvc.bishkek.su/. Figures for 1995 are located in Geografiia, weeklysupplement to the Kyrgyz newspaper Pervoe Sentiabria, December No. 47(1995): 1.

13 The sample size calculation used Epi-info for a proportion (relative margin) witha total population of 4,856,200 confidence rate at 95 per cent or .95 margin .05probability .50 sample size is 384.

14 ‘Women are used in defining boundaries and asserting the dominance of somemen over other men through the protection of ‘‘their’’ women – to protect ‘‘their’’women they engage in violent conflict and rape the women of ‘‘their’’ enemies’(Allen 1998: 59). Also described in the Burlet and Reid (1998) study.

15 See, for example, Phillips (1987, 1991, 1993, 1995, 1998, 1999).

Acknowledgement

As always, to Lou Ivey. Salta Sulaimanova, Ph.D. candidate at AmericanUniversity and a Hall of Nation Fellow, acted as an assistant in this work byconducting the statistical analysis as well as providing cultural insights andbalance, for which I am very grateful. Salta has worked in Central Asia andAustria for the United Nations High Commission for Refugees and theInternational Organization for Migration, respectively. Special acknowledge-ment is due to Kumar Bekbolotov, former American University in Kyrgyzstanstudent, for his critical role in data-gathering. Without Kumar’s dedication tothe subject and willingness to spend an entire summer interviewing men onthe practice of kidnapping, this research would not have been possible.

References

Allen, S. 1998. ‘Identity: Feminist Perspectives on ‘‘Race’’, Ethnicity, and Nationality’,in N. Charles and Hintjens, H. (eds) Gender, Ethnicity and Political Ideologies, pp.46–64. London: Routledge.

Amnesty International. 1996. Kyrgyzstan: A Tarnished Human Rights Record. London:Amnesty International. Available at http://www.amnesty.org (accessed26 December 2003).

Anderson, B. 1991. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread ofNationalism (revised edn). London: Verso.


Barot, R., Bradley, H. and Fenton, S. (eds). 1999. Ethnicity, Gender, and Social Change.London: MacMillian Press.

Benton, S. 1998. ‘Founding Fathers and Earth Mothers: Women’s Place at the ‘‘Birth’’of Nations’, in Charles, N. and Hintjens, H. (eds) Gender, Ethnicity, and PoliticalIdeologies, pp. 27–45. London: Routledge.

Bloch, M. 1987. ‘Descent and Sources of Contradiction in Representations of Womenand Kinship’, in Collier, J. F. and Yanagisako, S. J. (eds) Gender and Kinship: EssaysTowards a Unified Analysis, pp. 324–37. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Brubaker, R. 1994. ‘Nationhood and the National Question in the Soviet Union andPost-Soviet Eurasia: An Institutionalist Account’, Theory and Society 23(1): 47–78.

Burlet, S. and Reid, H. 1998. ‘A Gendered Uprising: Political Representation andMinority Ethnic Communities’, Ethnic and Racial Studies 21 (2): 217–85.

Carley, P. 1995. ‘The Legacy of the Soviet Political System and the Present Prospectsfor Developing Civil Society in Central Asia’, in Tismaneanu, V. (ed.) PoliticalCulture and Civil Society in Russia and the New States of Eurasia, pp. 292–318.Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.

Charles, N. and Hintjens, H. (eds). 1998. Gender, Ethnicity, and Political Ideologies.London: Routledge.

Cockburn, C. 1998. The Space between Us: Negotiating Gender and National Identitiesin Conflict. London: Zed Books.

Connell, R. W. 1987. Gender and Power: Society, the Person, and Sexual Politics.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Connell, R. W. 1993. ‘The Big Picture: Masculinities in Recent World History’, Theoryand Society 22(4): 597–623.

Corley, F. 1999. ‘The Specter of Wahhabism’, Transitions OnLine. Available at http://archive.tol.cz/transitions/mar99/thespect.html (accessed 28 December 2003).

Diuk, N. 1990. The Hidden Nations: The People Challenge the Soviet Union. New York:William Morrow & Company.

Goetz, A. M. 1991. ‘Feminism and the Claim to Know: Contradictions in FeministApproaches to Women in Development’, in Grant, R. and Newland, K. (eds) Genderand International Relations, pp. 133–57. Buckingham: Open University Press.

Goldstein, J. 2001. War and Gender: How Gender Shapes the War System and ViceVersa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Handrahan, L. 1999. Telephone interview with Magzimov Jenish Mamyrakashevich,Jogorku Kenesh staff member, Expert of Government Committee on Law-Making,6–7 September.

Handrahan, L. 2000a. ‘Implications of International Human Rights Law and BrideKidnapping in Kyrgyzstan’, Praxis, The Fletcher Journal of Development Studies16: 97–114.

Handrahan, L. 2000b. ‘International Human Rights Law and Bride Kidnapping inKyrgyzstan’, The Central Eurasia Project of The Open Society Institute—New York,January. Available at http://www.soros.org/cen_eurasia/eav012400.html (accessed23 December 2003).

Handrahan, L. 2000c. ‘Kidnapping Brides in Kyrgyzstan: Prescriptive Human Rights


Measures’, Human Rights Tribune 7 (1). Available at http://www.hri.ca/cftribune/templates/allissues.cfm (accessed 23 December 2003).

Handrahan, L. 2002. Gendering Ethnicity: Implications for US Democracy Assistancein Kyrgyzstan. New York: Routledge.

Hester, M., Kelly, L. and Radford, J. (eds). 1996. Women, Violence and Male Power.London: Open University Press.

Humphrey, C. 2002. The Unmaking of Soviet Life: Everyday Economies after Socialism(Culture and Society after Socialism). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

Huskey, E. 1997. ‘Kyrgyzstan: The Fate of Political Liberalization’, in Dawisha, K. andParrott, B. (eds) Conflict, Cleavage, and Change in Central Asia and the Caucasus,pp. 254–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hutchinson, J. and Smith, A. (eds). 1996. Ethnicity: Oxford Readers. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Itar-Tass. 1999. Preliminary Results of Census Announced in Kirghizia. Bishkek:National Statistics Committee.

Kandiyoti, D. 1998. ‘Bargaining with Patriarchy’, Gender and Society 2 (3): 274–90.Karasaeva, A. H. 1998. Kyrgyzstan’s Women: After Beijing Conference 1995 Situation

Analysis, Actions, Conception and Strategy up to 2000. Bishkek: Institution ofEqual Rights and Opportunities.

Kelly, L. 1996. ‘When Does the Speaking Profit Us? Reflections on the Challenges ofDeveloping Feminist Perspectives on Abuse and Violence by Women’, in Hester,M., Kelly, L. and Radford, J. (eds) Women, Violence and Male Power, pp. 19–37.London: Open University Press.

Kuehnast, A. B. and Green, D. 1997. Women and Gender Relations: The KyrgyzRepublic in Transition. Manila: The Asian Development Bank.

Lees, S. 1996. Carnal Knowledge: Rape on Trial. London: Hamish Hamilton.MacKinnon, C. 1989. Towards a Feminist Theory of the State. Cambridge: Harvard

University Press.MacWilliams, B. 2003. ‘The United States and Other Countries Battle for the Minds of

a Former Soviet Republic’, The Chronicle of Higher Education 49 (27): 39.Mandel, R. E., Ellen, R. and Humphrey, C. (eds). 2002. Markets and Moralities:

Ethnographies of Postsocialism. Oxford: Berg Publishing.Moghadam, V. M. 1997. ‘Nationalist Agendas and Women’s Rights Conflicts in

Afghanistan in the Twentieth Century’, in West, L. (ed.) Feminist Nationalism,pp. 75–99. New York: Routledge.

Neuwirth, J. 2001. ‘Female Genital Mutilation: A Guide to Laws and PoliciesWorldwide’, Human Rights Quarterly 23 (3): 836–40.

Phillips, A. (ed.). 1987. Feminism and Equality. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Phillips, A. 1991. Engendering Democracy. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State

University Press.Phillips, A. 1993. Democracy and Difference. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State

University Press.Phillips, A. 1995. The Politics of Presence. New York: Clarendon Press.Phillips, A. (ed.). 1998. Feminism and Politics. New York: Oxford University Press.Phillips, A. 1999. Which Equalities Matter? Malden: Blackwell.


Pollack, D. 2003. ‘Pro-Eating Disorder Websites: What Should Be the FeministResponse?’, Feminism and Psychology 13 (2): 246–51.

Radford, J. and Stanko, E. 1996. ‘Violence against Women and Children’, in Hester,M., Kelly, L. and Radford, J. (eds) Women, Violence and Male Power, pp. 65–80.London: Open University Press.

Recknagel, C. and Pannier, B. 1999. ‘1999 in Review: Islam, Politics Mix in RegionalConflicts’, Radio Free Europe. Available at http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/1999/12/F.RU.991210142436.html (accessed 28 December 2003).

Segal, L. 1990. Slow Motion: Changing Masculinities, Changing Men. Rutgers: RutgersUniversity Press.

Segal, L. 1993. ‘Changing Men: Masculinities in Context’, Theory and Society 22 (5):625–41.

Shanin, T. 1989. ‘Ethnicity in the Soviet Union: Analytical Perspectives and PoliticalStrategies’, Comparative Studies in Society and History 31 (3): 409–24.

Slezkine, Y. 1996. ‘The USSR as a Communal Apartment or How a Socialist StatePromoted Ethnic Particularism’, in Eley, G. and Suny, R. G. (eds) Becoming National,pp. 203–38. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Suzumi Young, J. 2002. ‘Female Genital Mutilation’, Journal of American MedicalAssociation 288 (9): 1130–32.

Tashakkori, A. and Teddlie, A. 1998. Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative andQuantitative Approaches. London: Sage Publications.

Tickner, J. A. 1992. Gender in International Relations. New York: Columbia Univer-sity Press.

United Nations. 1999. In Face of Widespread Violence against Kyrgyz Women,Kyrgyzstan Urged to Re-evaluate Its Programs and Policies. Geneva: United Nations.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). 1995. Human Development Report1995: Gender and Human Development. New York: UNDP.

US Department of State. 1996. U.S. Department of State, Kyrgyz Republic HumanRights Practices, 1995. Washington, DC: US Department of State.

US Department of State. 1997. U.S. Department of State: Kyrgyz Republic CountryReport on Human Rights Practices for 1996. Washington, DC: US Departmentof State.

US Department of State. 2000. U.S. Department of State Country Reports on HumanRights Practices: Kyrgyz Republic, 1999. Washington, DC: US Department of State.

Yuval-Davis, N. 1997. Gender and Nation. London: Sage Publications.Yuval-Davis, N. 1998. ‘Beyond Differences: Women, Empowerment, and Coalition

Politics’, in Charles, N. and Hintjens, H. (eds) Gender, Ethnicity and PoliticalIdeologies, pp. 168–89. London: Routledge.

Yuval-Davis, N. and Anthias, F. 1989. Women-Nation-State. New York: St Martin’sPress.

Yuval-Davis, N. and Werbner, P. (eds). 1999. Women, Citizenship and Difference.London: Zed.


Documents

Hunting for Women: Bride-kidnapping in Kyrgyzstan