The Lives of Others – The (De)construction of Feminine Citizenship in the Framework of Human Rights
Ohvanainen, Eija (2023)
2023
Julkaisu on tekijänoikeussäännösten alainen. Teosta voi lukea ja tulostaa henkilökohtaista käyttöä varten. Käyttö kaupallisiin tarkoituksiin on kielletty.
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2023050541469
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe2023050541469
Tiivistelmä
This thesis is an attempt to discuss citizenship and gender within a shared framework that considers experiences of citizenship as gender-differentiated. The main claim made in the thesis is that female citizenship is an artefact created in a process where female identities are socially constructed through language and public opinion and that this process also has effects on legal practice and outcomes and may even lead to discriminative outcomes with regard to these women’s human and fundamental rights as citizens, particularly with regard to women belonging to marginalised groups and considered as Others, such as women with links to ISIS (the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria).
The thesis aims at analysing current gendered practices of constructing and deconstructing the citizenship of the female Other, and the legal outcomes of these practices, both at the general level, where the ongoing academic debate on the issues is synthetised and analysed, and more in particular through the analysis of the case of Shamima Begum, a British citizen who left her country as a teenager to join ISIS and later, after being found to be held in a camp in Syria, was deprived of her British citizenship and, in addition, was also denied leave to entry. Ms Begum’s case provides a telling example of how women with links to ISIS, their citizenships and rights associated with it have been publicly debated and treated. It also believed that through the analysis of one single case and by considering one individual’s ill fate much can be said on how feminine citizenship, especially that of those who are considered as Others, is perceived and dealt with in the era of counterterrorism and increased risk of violent extremism, both domestic and foreign.
Based on this discussion, the main conclusions of this thesis are as follows:
1) Citizenship, as a gendered concept that is socially constructed, contains elements of gender discrimination and racism, and reflects the existence of a tiered system of human rights.
2) Law is not, nor should it be considered, gender-neutral.
3) Rule of law is a question of reason, not a question of emotions, and the (de)construction of feminine citizenship, especially that of those deemed as Others, and the legal outcomes of this process have much wider implications on and prove meaningful for the whole human rights framework and its future.
The thesis aims at analysing current gendered practices of constructing and deconstructing the citizenship of the female Other, and the legal outcomes of these practices, both at the general level, where the ongoing academic debate on the issues is synthetised and analysed, and more in particular through the analysis of the case of Shamima Begum, a British citizen who left her country as a teenager to join ISIS and later, after being found to be held in a camp in Syria, was deprived of her British citizenship and, in addition, was also denied leave to entry. Ms Begum’s case provides a telling example of how women with links to ISIS, their citizenships and rights associated with it have been publicly debated and treated. It also believed that through the analysis of one single case and by considering one individual’s ill fate much can be said on how feminine citizenship, especially that of those who are considered as Others, is perceived and dealt with in the era of counterterrorism and increased risk of violent extremism, both domestic and foreign.
Based on this discussion, the main conclusions of this thesis are as follows:
1) Citizenship, as a gendered concept that is socially constructed, contains elements of gender discrimination and racism, and reflects the existence of a tiered system of human rights.
2) Law is not, nor should it be considered, gender-neutral.
3) Rule of law is a question of reason, not a question of emotions, and the (de)construction of feminine citizenship, especially that of those deemed as Others, and the legal outcomes of this process have much wider implications on and prove meaningful for the whole human rights framework and its future.