We still don’t really understand Muslims very well. Nor do we seem to understand domestic violence. Both have been around long enough, so we should have gotten to know them by now.
Last Sunday’s verdict in a Kingston murder trial focused on the religion of the accused. It sparked a lot of talking head television commentary. A lot of it wondered if the murders were a normal part of Muslim culture.
It was domestic violence, no different from the brand practised by Catholics, Presbyterians, Sikhs, Hindi and every other sect of the God-fearing population. Atheists as well. When a Catholic man murders his wife and children, the news channels don’t rush out to interview priests and bishops to see if there is a connection between the papacy and the crime.
When Edward Dakin burned his former girlfriend and her daughter to death in Guelph, the papers didn’t seek out his pastor for an explanation. But misrepresent the violence as having something to do with honour, and the chatterers will pick the Koran apart trying to find clues. Imams will be called out of the mosque to shed light on the problem.
Spousal and child abuse is nothing more than a brutal control measure. There are men everywhere, from Afghanistan to Canada and at all points between, who are scared silly of losing their control over the women in their lives. So they impoverish them, beat them, and, if all else fails, they kill them.
There are far more men who do not do this, but it is still a serious social problem which the press could do a much better job of analyzing.
Mohammad Shafia was a heartless, controlling monster. He twisted his son, bullied his wife and feared his daughters. They were becoming too independent, getting out of his sphere of influence. Prisons across the country are full of men just like him. Shelters are full of women just like his wife and daughters. Churches, temples, synagogues, mosques and gurdwaras all have their share of men who have not been caught yet.
The murders – whether committed by Edward Dakin or Mohammad Shafia – have no cultural significance, no deep meaning.
They do have warning signs. In nearly every case, the final crime is preceded by several lesser ones. Shafia’s daughters cried out for help to school counsellors and other professionals. Timely help did not get to them, and that is part of the tragedy. It is true of them, and it is true of all the others.
Canadians take great pride in the social safety net we have built. It cushions the blows of many hardships. Too frequently, it does not save the most vulnerable among us. Shelters are overcrowded and underfunded. There are not enough affordable homes available for women who are seeking an escape from an abusive relationship.
As a result, they are impaled on the horns of a cruel dilemma. Do they risk staying with a man who beats them but provides a warm house? Or do they flee into a life of uncertainty, insecurity and poverty?
• • •
Speaking of domestic violence, there is a park on Gordon Street dedicated to Marianne Goulden, a victim of fatal spousal violence. Some developers want to crowd it out with a condo development that stretches the allowable limits. City staff are recommending that it go ahead. Anywhere else, and it might be alright. But not there.
Maybe it’s just a matter of symbolism, but sometimes that’s important. Women who suffer what Goulden, Jackie and Julie Kaulback, and the Shafia daughters did are always being crowded out, pushed to the edges.
Let’s leave their park alone. Keep the condos within their limits.