Abstract
In identity research, scientists usually have different foci. Some examine the structure of identity and describe different facets (e.g., cultural, religious, gender identity), others concentrate on the question how individuals arrive at this structure, which underlies constant change. This commentary shows how conceptual clarifications can assist in understanding developmental processes of identity. Facets or voices (as they are called in dialogical self research) that are closely intertwined in one cultural context can be less so in others. On the basis of these conceptual clarifications and additional cultural dimensions, Skandrani, Taïeb and Moro’s (2011) interpretations leading to hybrid identity formation and conflicting voices are contrasted with alternative viewpoints. It is suggested that the cultural setting demands—as well as allows—agency that can lead to the development of new voices and protection strategies that do not necessarily depict conflict.
In their article, Skandrani, Taïeb, and Moro (2011) focus on young women of Maghrebine origin in France. First, the authors introduce the term transnational practices, which can be of a social, political, or economical kind. The women’s parents and the women themselves use these practices to stay in touch with their countries of origin while living in Europe. Since the birth of these women in France, their environment has been influenced by practices that their parents established (that is, an intergenerational family process). Skandrani et al. (2011) now ask how these special circumstances of being part of two different cultures (Maghrebine and French) influence the identity development of the women interviewed. How do these women manage to integrate different expectations, values, traditions, and so forth? According to the authors, another difficulty for these women is the way Maghrebine women are viewed in France: as victims that must be emancipated from men. The authors also criticize other researchers for not having taken historical and political aspects into account when describing identity development. Demuth and Keller (2011), as only one example, do stress the need to understand identity formation “within its specific sociohistoric and ecocultural embeddedness” (p. 426). According to Demuth and Keller, the dimensions autonomy and relatedness—dimensions that Skandrani and colleagues also hint at in their data analysis—can be seen as basic organizers of identity that allow for a description of identity formation in different cultures.
In contrast to dimensions that influence the developmental process, structural aspects of identity development can be described with the help of stages or categorized assimilation strategies. Stages, as the word implies, thus only describe static observations. If researchers want to understand how an individual arrived at this (temporary) stage, and if or how historical and political aspects influenced the individual in this way, process-oriented research procedures must be applied. Examining inner dialogues as done in dialogical self research is definitely an option. The authors thus define identity construction as dialogical process according to Hermans (2001), whereas identity itself is composed of multiple dynamic and relatively autonomous identity positions (voices). Throughout the article, terms like “cultural identity,” “Muslim identity,” and Muslim/Maghrebine/Arabic voices are used to finally demonstrate that the authors are not examining overall identity construction, but specific facets (i.e., voices). An interesting question to be asked is: When are the Muslim and the Maghrebine voice one and the same, and when can they even contradict or complement each other?
Cultural, religious, national, and ethnic identities: All the same?
Let me begin to answer this question by relating an instance from a real life event. On a trip to Israel, we drove past a sign on which could be read: Jewish National Forest. At first, I did not think about it further, but then it occurred to me: Can a forest be of any religion? Should not the sign say Israeli National Forest? In this case, the answer is not as easy as it seems. Further elaborations of Israeli friends indicated that my understanding of “Jewish” only included religion, but excluded the fact that—as the origin of the term Jewish stresses—it also refers to nationality and ethnicity. In fact, the term “Jews” stems from the Latin term Judaean, which translates into “from the land of Judaea,” referring to a place of origin (location).
In this example, national, ethnic/cultural, and religious identities seem to be intertwined. But is this necessarily the case? Skandrani et al. (2011) state that they did not find any differences between their participants that could be traced back to their countries of origin. Unfortunately, they do not state how they arrived at this conclusion. But let us take their conclusion for a fact: National identities based on the countries’ boundaries (“I am a Tunisian, Algerian, or Moroccan”) did not seem to matter in this case; more important were, according to Skandrani et al., regional identities (“I am Maghrebine”). What does “being a Maghrebine” include besides having parents that were born in Maghreb? In quite a few studies (e.g., Roudometof, 2002, or Schultz & Sackmann, 2001), individuals refer, when asked what their regional or national identities mean to them, to cultural characteristics. Cultural and national/regional identities can therefore stand for the same concepts. Schnell (1990), for example, examined 80 indicators for cultural or ethnic identities in migrant groups. These 80 indicators could be subsumed in the following categories:
language use and language mastery; religious denomination and religious practice; subjective affiliation to a certain ethnic group; perception of discrimination; contacts with the dominant and foreign ethnic groups; contacts with the country of origin; self-identification; desire for ethnic cohesion; desire for segregated living; feeling of homelessness; sympathy for different nations; goals of education; gender role orientation; cultural habits (music, video, newspapers, food); recognition of national holidays.
Of all indicators for ethnic or cultural identities, religion and gender role orientation are two important factors, but definitely not the only ones. It is also not claimed that the above-presented list is exhaustive. When describing their research procedure, Skandrani et al. (2011) seem to treat religion and cultural practices (language, holidays, etc.) as two separate variables. In countries that proclaim a state religion, as Islam is for Tunisia, Morocco, and Algeria, both these variables are, nevertheless, likely to be linked. All three countries from which the parents of the interviewees migrated are 98%–100% Muslim. A Maghrebine might thus name the fact of being a Muslim as an integral part of her cultural identity (Figure 1a). For myself, my national or maybe even my cultural identity (I am German) has—from my very subjective point of view—nothing to do with my religious identity of being an atheist (Figure 1b), although I would perhaps not be an atheist if I had not been born in a country that claims religious liberty. My viewpoint can therefore never be separated from the sociocultural environment I live in.
Religious identity: (a) Religious identity as a marker for ethnic identity and (b) religious identity as a separate identity facet next to national/cultural identity.
Culture is, on the one hand, the macro-level context an individual lives in, which influences every facet of identity. On the other hand, I can ask an individual about his or her cultural identity and what aspects of it are important in constituting this facet of himself or herself.
The inseparability of cultural dimensions and identity facets can also be demonstrated with respect to the norm of virginity. This cultural practice, as Skandrani et al. call it, is also influenced by Islam. In the Koran, (female) virgins are considered to be “pure and undefiled” (Yusuf Ali translation, Al-Waqia, Chapter 56, Verse 36). A man looking for a new woman after divorce shall be given “consorts better than you, who submit (their wills), who believe, who are devout, who turn to Allah in repentance, who worship (in humility), who travel (for Faith) and fast, previously married or virgins” (Yusuf Ali translation, At-Tahrim, Chapter 66, Verse 5). Religious values have influenced and still influence gender roles, gender identity, and sexual morals in Maghreb and other countries. They also influence or sometimes even represent cultural practices. Religious values and gender roles as well as sexual morals are, at the present time, more loosely linked in France, Germany, or other Western countries than they are in Arabic countries. For women who are part of both worlds, different value systems collide, and the women interviewed by Skandrani et al. (2011) must indeed negotiate their individual identity positions between these systems. What does it mean to be a Maghrebine in a non-Maghrebine environment? While gender identity, religious identity, and cultural identity are used to determine each other within the microsystem of the family, how can I position myself in an environment that demands conscious decision-making and self-awareness through self-narrations?
Mixing identities (hybrid) or identifying new voices?
Of particular interest is the finding of Skandrani et al. (2011) that some of the women are, from my perspective, actually in the process of dissolving the facets of religious and cultural identity. Questions like, “Do I really want to adhere to Islam or is it just because I grew up in it?” or the statement “My parents don’t know the difference between Moroccan culture and Islam” demonstrate this quite vividly. Instead of proclaiming different identity facets, Skandrani et al. (2011) speak of the development of a more authentic Islam, freed of tradition. At the same time, they claim that the women do not turn away from Islam, because this would be “a too painful denial of their parents,” a statement that is not circumstantiated further.
Whether these observations really stand for a “break” with both the society of origin and with France, as the authors suggest, needs to be discussed. For Western countries, it is not unusual to re-interpret traditional writings, such as the Bible. If we did not, all physicians and nurses working on a Sunday would still commit deadly sins. The women interviewed thus find their way of negotiating different identity facets by actually recognizing them as such. Instead of a Muslim voice being transformed by the French voice, the French environment would allow for an independent Muslim voice to evolve. Agency is another helpful concept here, when examining the influence of different cultural environments. Demuth and Keller state that:
Agency allows an individual to examine aspects of the external contexts and to select specific aspects to incorporate into one’s sense of self. In cultural contexts dominated by values that emphasize the well-being of, and loyalty to, the larger group such as the family or larger communities, the exercise of agency is in fact not desirable. (2011, p. 427)
The women in this study actually examine different aspects of the self and decide on which ones they want to incorporate into their sense of self, just as their French peers do, while the same exploration might not be desirable in the family context.
Despite familial expectations, the interviewed women are thus finding new ways of constituting their cultural and religious identities, so that the term “hybrid” identity (Skandrani et al., 2011, p. 16) might also not be appropriate. In the case of Azza, who does not believe in God, but behaves like a Muslim as her parents expect in order to avoid arguments, “mixing” identities cannot necessarily be the conclusion. She is a “spiritual” person (religious identity) and chooses to not present her religious identity to the outside on all occasions—perhaps to avoid hurting her identity facet of “being a good daughter.” Some of the homosexual adolescents I have worked with in my own research only revealed their sexual identities to a few friends, but not to others, because they feared discrimination. Nevertheless, they did not question the fact that they were homosexual (Watzlawik, 2004). In addition, Dwairy (2002, as cited in Demuth & Keller, 2011) showed that in Arabic cultures, concealing one’s real feelings, thoughts, and attitudes to avoid confrontations and maintain good relationships is reasonable, and does not necessarily lead to conflicts within the individual. These cultural differences have to be taken into account when interpreting data from different cultural settings.
What’s the bottom line?
Overall, Skandrani et al. (2011) wanted to know whether there are particular transnational practices that operate as symbolic markers of the young women’s identity construction and intergenerational relations. Therefore, with the help of semi-structured interviews, they addressed specific transnational practices that seemed to be relevant according to the literature. Because the structure of the interview is not described in detail, I assume that the women were asked to elaborate on these specific transnational practices directly. The interview data was later analyzed with the help of interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) that led to the identification of “two transnational practices as salient issues in identity construction and the intergenerational relations [. . .]: the Muslim religion and the norm of virginity” (Skandrani et al., 2011).
The authors identify the most controversial topics among those they address in the interviews as the most salient issues. The semi-structured approach did not lead to the identification of new transnational practices or topics that also could be relevant for identity construction. An initial list of all mentioned topics as the first step in presenting the IPA’s results, as Smith and Osborn (2003) suggest, is not presented. Very likely, this list would be identical to the transnational practices addressed by the authors in the semi-structured interviews. The interviews thus helped to identify those transnational practices that the young women explored the most. Other aspects might also be relevant for identity construction, but needed less active negotiation due to less conflicting identity positions. The latter does not imply, however, that less controversial practices cannot serve as symbolic markers for identity.
Overall, the research question of Skandrani et al. (2011) as well as their interview construction is less open than it seemed at first. They are examining how the Maghrebine women manage to negotiate conflicting identity positions that arise due to differences between their familial cultural background and the culture of the country they live in. The authors offer the transnational practices to be discussed and therefore do not arrive at new topics or practices. Nevertheless, they identify the most conflicting topics among those they offered and show how the women interviewed negotiate and find their identities under these circumstances. Their interpretations of what they have observed are possible, but—as shown here—not the only ones. Further research is needed to gain more insight.
In none of the interview transcripts did I experience the women as victims, nor did I locate passages that supported the assumption that the women adopted this role. The results of the authors also have not identified discrimination experiences as salient identity markers. Nevertheless, the authors return to their more or less hidden mission of showing that the societal prejudices against Maghrebine women are lacking evidence in the discussion. I wish they had incorporated this mission more openly in their research question and data analysis. I also wish that they had questioned their own interpretations more critically, as they themselves are part of certain cultural systems that influence their meaning-making processes. If both had been done more thoroughly, one would be less distracted from the very interesting findings by political statements that should not be part of a stringent scientific paper—even if one agrees with the general message.
What can identity researchers learn from this?
Identity development cannot, as shown, be examined without taking the cultural and social contexts into account the individuals live in. In addition, the cultural context of the researcher also influences the interpretation of the data collected. Well-defined concepts like identity markers, voices, facets, transnational practices, etc. help to limit the scope of interest, which often is necessary to answer specific questions, but they also entail the danger of extracting features out of the “bigger picture” and neglecting cross-relations. When examining specific identity facets (voices), the easiest way to find out whether they are independent or intertwined is to ask. What does it mean to belong to a certain ethnic group within a certain context? What are the meaning-making processes involved? Starting from a broader perspective and then, once the overall picture is assessed, addressing specific markers, if they were not mentioned before, seems reasonable. Nevertheless, the researcher is always asked to switch perspectives and to question whether his or her idea of identity can even be applied in a certain cultural context that is different from his or her own—not an easy task to solve.