Abstract

As gendered discourses around migration proliferate, research and practitioner focus is often trained on experiences of women in interpersonal capacities, primarily in regard to subjections to predominately male violence. Drawing on research in Britain and activist participation with women seeking asylum, this article expands this focus into the realm of state-corporate harms against women. Previous research demonstrates that immigration law and policy often work to minimalize autonomy at the ground level, and dependence on spousal visas or housing and finances can exacerbate dependence on men, including violent men. This article argues that this punitive landscape of Britain’s asylum system facilitates further violence against women seeking asylum, rather than ensuring protection. Moreover, harm is inflicted by the structures of coercive control set forth by the state and its amorphous relations with corporations. Such structures are largely manufactured by the British state, but increasingly enacted by its corporate allies. These environments, I argue, mirror those of domestically violent perpetrators and work to gradually corrode women’s autonomy and indeed sense of safety.

Highlights

  • Confronting an Intersectional Continuum of ViolenceLegal and social discourses around migration and refugee status have gradually evolved to take greater account of the rights of women seeking asylum (Canning 2010, 2014, 2016, 2017; Crawley 2001; Girma et al 2014; McKinnon 2016; Pickering 2010)

  • It would serve to reason that the lives of women seeking asylum in the United Kingdom (UK)—in my research, Britain (England, Scotland, Wales), —should have improved in correlation with such recognitions

  • It draws comparisons between the abusive behaviors attributed to domestic violence and maps them onto experiences reported in empirical research

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Legal and social discourses around migration and refugee status have gradually evolved to take greater account of the rights of women seeking asylum (Canning 2010, 2014, 2016, 2017; Crawley 2001; Girma et al 2014; McKinnon 2016; Pickering 2010). This article, goes further still in harvesting empirical examples of instances where women’s safety or wellbeing—or both—can be compromised or diminished through actions and decisions made by the British state It draws comparisons between the abusive behaviors attributed to domestic violence and maps them onto experiences reported in empirical research. Overall, it highlights the increasingly amorphous relationship between states and corporations (Snider et al 2003; Tombs 2016) in their roles related to border controls, and problematizes the multifarious ways that coercive—and corrosive—controls can be enacted in the lives of women seeking asylum. The impacts are gendered, intersectional and—for survivors of domestic or sexual violence—can extend or compound a continuum of violence in the lives of migrant women

Methodology
A Case of “The Domestic Controller”: When Protection Meets Subjection
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.