Gendered Perspectives on Integration Discourses and Measures

Abstract

This article focuses on gendered discourses in integration policy and the problems immigrants pose in the reproduction of inequalities in a number of European countries. There has been little consideration of how gender categories operate in relation to broader political discourses around the construction of ‘us’ and ‘them’ and the constitution of national social and political communities and identities. Yet gender issues have become significant in the backlash against multiculturalism and gender and sexual relations have moved to the centre of debates about the necessity to enforce integration, if not assimilation. The first section outlines recent developments in the immigration‐integration nexus in different European states. The second section draws out some of the reasons for the focus on family migration and spouses who are seen as the main importers of the ‘backward’ practices and with ‘doubtful’ parenting practices for future generations of citizens. The third section tackles the shift of current debates about integration of migrant women from the periphery, where they were largely invisible or mere appendages of men, to the centre, where they have acquired in the process a heightened, though not necessarily positive, visibility. Too often, representations of migrant women are based on a homogenised image of uneducated and backward migrants as victims of patriarchal cultures, legitimizing in this way the use of immigration controls to reduce the numbers entering and to tackle broader social issues, as has clearly been the case with forced marriages. Furthermore, the more discourses focus on Muslim women and Islam as inimical to European societies, the more the debate becomes culturalised and marginalises the socio‐economic dimension of integration and the structural inequalities migrants face. Thus pre‐entry tests may have less to do with integration than with a desire to reduce the flow of marriage migrants or to raise their human capital.

Conceptualising integration: a framework for empirical research, taking marriage migration as a case study

“…The logic of this design was to address directly the implied or explicit suggestion that marriage within the UK ethnic population is preferable in integration terms to transnational marriage (Home Office, 2002;Kofman et al, 2015). The sibling pair design holds constant some variables which may be independently related to integration but may also influence the likelihood of transnational marriage and therefore give rise to the danger of inappropriate attribution of causality to marriage choices.…”

Conditions of cultural citizenship: intersections of gender, race and age in public debates on family migration

“…Policy makers see family migration often as unwanted migration (Joppke 1998), and thus this type of migration has started to become subject to increased restrictions. Family migrants tend to feature in political debates as a group that is difficult to integrate into the job market (Kofman et al 2013). Furthermore, political discussions in the media on tightening family migration legislation often tend to frame the topic as a challenge for gender equality (Hagelund 2008;Razack 2004).…”

“…Bonjour and de Hart 2013;Eggebø 2010;Kofman et al 2013) and citizenship and gender (e.g. Lister 2003;Lister et al 2007;Hellsten et al 2006), we !…”

“…Kofman et al 2013). Integration thus features as a mechanism that works for some, but not for others, which highlights the belief that the ability to integrate can be determined before immigration, 'at the border'.…”

Female Migrant Entrepreneurs in Vienna: Mobility and its Embeddedness

“…Female migrants in particular are considered keepers of 'traditional cultures' and a threat to the collective need for homogeneity and cultural identity (Nuscheler 2004, p. 23). Given the relatively high unemployment rate among migrant women, they are furthermore perceived as potentially 'exploiting' the Austrian welfare system (Kofman et al 2015). How migrants, defined as 'ethnic other', challenge these "groupist assumptions" (Pfaff-Czarnecka 2013, p. 8) and rationalise these constructions and experiences in their practices, daily interactions and economic activities, as well as whether and how mobility becomes meaningful and is negotiated, will be discussed.…”