British, Yemeni and Muslim: How Yemeni Women Construct Their

Identities in Sheffield

Nicola Wilson

MA in Sociological Research

Department of Sociological Studies

September 2008

1

‘The grandchild of a Turkish immigrant in Cologne may well be Turkish, but being Turkish in Germany means something different from being Turkish in Turkey’

Thomas Hylland Eriksen (2002: 138)

2

Abstract

This study offers a detailed exploration of identification processes amongst a group of second and third generation British Yemeni women. Focusing on their self-representations as individuals and also as members of the Yemeni community in Sheffield, I have examined the ways in which individuals define themselves, in a specific time, place and context. In order to do so, I have employed a constructivist model (Jenkins, 2008a) in which identity is processual, contingent and variable.

In the summer of 2008 I interviewed 10 women who all worked for the same community organisation in Sheffield. Findings present a picture of individual identities which are multiple and overlapping, constructed through negotiation and competition between ethnic, religious and gendered identities. These are influenced both by circumstantial and structural factors, and also by individual and collective actions. Processes of assertion and categorisation, reformulation, redefinition and rejection are all observable in the ways in which different identities are articulated by individuals.

Interviewees simultaneously claimed dual identities as Yemeni and British, recognising that the salience of these was contextual. Religion was closely woven into ethnic identity; for most women being Muslim and Yemeni were equally important, although in some cases religion was prioritised. Religious identity also appeared to reinforce ethnic identity. Gender was also important in identity construction, with parental and collective ideals of gendered behaviour influencing ethnic identity. However changes were observed in the ways that individuals responded to these; marriage, work and surveillance were the main arenas in which ethnic identities were contested, with evidence of resistance and renegotiation by most participants.

Finally, in support of Dwyer (2000), I suggest that this study demonstrates British Yemeni women’s identities as ‘hybrid’. Fabricating them from the raw material of primary identities and also from lived experiences, individuals have crafted their own identities in which the original elements are combined but also transformed.

3

Acknowledgements

First and foremost an enormous thank you is due to the women who took part in this project, giving up their time (sometimes lots of it) and speaking on subjects of some sensitivity.

Thanks also to my supervisor, Richard Jenkins, for guidance, directions and general enthusiasm for the subject of my study.

Finally to my husband, Stephen Connelly -bombarded with questions and ideas – much gratitude for his patience and encouragement during my year of learning.

4

Table of Contents

Table of Contents.............................................................................................................................5

16310 words.....................................................................................................................................6

Chapter One: Introduction...............................................................................................................7

Chapter Two: Rationale for the Research.......................................................................................11General theories of identity, groupness and ethnicity.....................................................................11

Empirical studies of ethnicity...........................................................................................................17

Yemenis in Sheffield and elsewhere................................................................................................19

Chapter Three: Methodology .........................................................................................................22Access and sampling........................................................................................................................24

Ethical issues and the position of the researcher............................................................................27

Chapter Four: Findings....................................................................................................................31Asserted identities...........................................................................................................................31

Being Yemeni ..............................................................................................................................32

Being British.................................................................................................................................33

Being Muslim...............................................................................................................................34

Being Arab...or not.......................................................................................................................36

Ascribed identities...........................................................................................................................37

Interaction between identities........................................................................................................39

Yemeni and British.......................................................................................................................39

British but Muslim.......................................................................................................................41

Gender .......................................................................................................................................41

Contextual factors in identity construction.....................................................................................42

Internal forces: history and social institutions.............................................................................42

External factors...........................................................................................................................45

Marriage as an example of hybridity and change between generations.........................................46

Changes between generations........................................................................................................48

Chapter Five: Discussion.................................................................................................................50Thick and thin identities...................................................................................................................50

5

The generational model of identity.................................................................................................52

Unanticipated consequences...........................................................................................................54

Similarity and difference within the group......................................................................................56

The case study.................................................................................................................................58

Chapter Six: Conclusions.................................................................................................................60Validity ............................................................................................................................................64

Relevance to Policy..........................................................................................................................65

References......................................................................................................................................67

Appendix 1: Semi Structured Interview Guide...............................................................................71

16310 words

6

Chapter One: Introduction

This study offers a detailed exploration of identification processes among a group of women

from a small but significant ethnic minority in Sheffield. Focusing on their self-

representations as individuals and also members of a collective – the Yemeni community – I

have attempted to unravel some of the complexity behind the ways that individuals define

themselves, in a specific time, place and context. In order to do so, I have employed a

constructivist model of identity (Jenkins, 2008a) which sees it as processual, contingent and

variable

The inspiration for this research arose from a series of interviews in 2007 with British

Yemenis living in Sheffield, providing material for an exhibition in a Sheffield museum.

Regardless of variations in age and backgrounds, interviewees articulated a strong sense of

Britishness alongside their ethnic identities as Yemenis. This was often in spite of their

awareness of being seen as ‘other’ by the white majority population. This encounter with

the dynamics of identity – sameness and difference, ascription and assertion – and a dual

rather than single ethnic/national identification stirred my curiosity. It seemed an

interesting area to research, and one which has significance for current debates on national

identity and multiculturalism in Britain. These are not purely academic interests but have

the power to influence policy, political action and popular understandings of identity

(Parekh, 2000). My subject is also relevant to contemporary constructions of Muslims as

radical extremists, unwilling to engage in British society and therefore a ‘threat’ to Western

secular traditions (Nagel and Staeheli, 2007). Media reports have reinforced such images

and presented an essentialist interpretation of Islam in spite of clear evidence that Muslims

think about and practice their faith in a multitude of ways. Muslim women in particular

7

have been caricatured as subservient and oppressed by their menfolk, trapped in patriarchal

systems of authority which assert traditional religious and cultural values. From my own

friendships and contact with Muslim women in Sheffield and elsewhere, I know this is

untrue. I have therefore sought to explore ethnic identity from a standpoint of

acknowledging diversity and difference.

Although seldom noticed by the majority population, Yemenis have lived in Sheffield for

over fifty years. Yemeni men first began arriving in Sheffield during the 1950’s and 60’s,

seeking work in the steel industry in the post-war period of economic prosperity. Regarding

their migration as temporary, they left families behind in Yemen and resisted integration

into the host society (Halliday, 1992; Searle, 2007). However as the myth of the ‘sojourner’

was reluctantly abandoned, wives and children began to arrive in Sheffield in the 1980’s and

90’s. Although born in Yemen, the children of first and second generation migrants have

settled in Sheffield and made it their home. Many have strong attachments to the

neighbourhoods in which they live. At the same time they remain distinctive and apart from

mainstream society (Halliday, 1992), often invisible to the wider population of Sheffield and

disadvantaged by poverty and discrimination. Growing up in both Yemen and Britain, they

navigate between the cultural worlds of their parents, relatives in Yemen, and that of British

society.

Traditional views of second generation migrants have tended to refer to them as having

‘divided loyalites’ (Anwar,1998) and experiencing identity problems. More recent writers

(Dwyer, 2000, Burdsey, 2006) note how individuals negotiate between different identities

and have adapted them to fit new situations. Thus ‘hybrid’ identities develop which sit

between the extremes of assimilation and retrenchment. Eriksen (p 137) points out that

8

these are not necessarily problematic but involve a wide range of identity processes,

operating at the boundaries. It is this particular arena of identity that I have chosen to

explore, focusing on women who belong to either second or third generation British

Yemenis.

Throughout this study I have used a practical definition of identity advocated by Jenkins

(2008a). In his words identity is:

the human capacity - rooted in language – to know who’s who (and hence

what is what). This involves knowing who we are, knowing who others are,

them knowing who we are, us knowing who they think we are, and so on; a

multidimensional classification or mapping of the human world and our

places in it, as individuals and as members of collectives (Jenkins, 2008a: 5).

This places emphasis on the interactional element of identity and its constructed and

negotiated nature. It includes both active and passive processes of assertion and ascription;

we define ourselves in relation to others which requires us to consider what makes ‘us’ the

same, and what makes ‘them’ different.

Using semi-structured interviews, the opinions, beliefs and aspirations of a small group of

British Yemeni women have been investigated, frequently in terms of events in their lives, to

develop an understanding of how they see themselves in relation to others in different

situations. My research focuses on the interplay between different identities,

acknowledging that these cannot be seen in isolation from each other and must be studied

together. Thus gendered and religious identities are included in this particular case study,

with content and boundaries closely studied. The dynamics of identification processes are

also examined by considering some of the changes that have taken place over time,

9

comparing the views of past generations with previous ones, albeit through the narratives

of participants. Variation in identity claims and positions within the group are also

examined in order to understand what factors might impinge on individual identifications.

My research aim is outlined in the question:

How do second and third generation British Yemeni women negotiate between the

different ethnic, national and religious aspects of their identity?

Within this study interviewees are defined as second or third generation according to their

relationship to first generation migrants, although most were born in Yemen (even those

belonging to the third generation) and spent their childhood in both Yemen and Britain.

In Chapter Two, I review a selection of literature relevant to the study of identity and

ethnicity, using this material to illuminate the rationale for this research. In Chapter Three I

describe the methodology used and ethical issues arising during the research process. In

Chapter Four findings are presented with discussion and analysis covered in Chapter Five.

Chapter Six deals with conclusions and policy implications.

10

Chapter Two: Rationale for the Research

The purpose of this chapter is to set the context and provide a rationale for my research.

Beginning with general theories and conceptualisations of identity, groupness and ethnicity,

I review the main arguments and establish the theoretical basis underpinning this study.

The second part focuses on empirical studies of ethnic identities in Britain and current

knowledge about Yemenis in Sheffield in order to identify issues and themes relevant to

British Yemenis and define the field of interest.

General theories of identity, groupness and ethnicity

Although there is general agreement among most writers on the importance of identity in

contemporary life (e.g. Gilroy, 1997; Hall, 1996; Woodward, 1997), there are many different

definitions of the concept and uses of the term. These illustrate a variety of theoretical

approaches, ranging between essentialist and poststructuralist extremes (Moya, 2000).

Essentialist or ‘primordialist’ understandings (Cornell and Hartmann, 2007) are premised on

the notion of identity as a set of fixed and immutable attributes over which individuals have

no choice. They are presented as ‘natural’ and enduring, deeply embedded and often based

on history or biology. Although seldom embraced in academic studies of identity (with a

few exceptions such as Issacs (1975) cited in Cornell and Hartmann, 2007), they often

pervade political and popular concepts of national, ethnic and racial identities. At the other

end of the spectrum, identity is described by some postmodern theorists (e.g. Butler, 1990,

cited in Jenkins, 2008a) as vague and indeterminate and therefore illusory. Consequently

Brubaker and Cooper (2000: 5) have proposed that the concept should be discarded. They

11

regard it as too ambiguous and paradoxical in its meanings to provide a tool for social

analysis. In between these extremes authors such as Jenkins (2008a) recognise identity as a

real phenomenon which cannot be abandoned. Adopting a constructivist approach, he

proposes that while caution is needed to recognise the limitations of terminology, the

concept is still meaningful and offers a valid theoretical framework to explain the complexity

and variability of human experience.

Throughout this study I have adopted the constructivist model of identity advocated by

Jenkins (2008a: 5), outlined in the introduction. He defines identity not as a ‘thing’ that is

held by individuals or groups but as a process, involving social interaction, something which

‘isn’t just there...(but) must always be established’ through contact with others (ibid: 17).

Language is central to this process (Joseph, 2004). Using this concept, identification is what

matters, and identities are fluid, multiple and contextual, able to change in relation to time,

place and circumstances and based on the interplay of sameness and difference.

Ethnicity is regarded as a form of collective identification, premised on the notion of

‘groupness’ as part of the reality of the human world which can be studied. Echoing

debates on identity, Brubaker (2002) disputes the existence of groups, viewing them as an

imaginary concept. He argues against ‘ethnic common sense’ which treats ‘groupness’ as

unproblematic and therefore assumed to be real. Others have rejected his definition of

groups and posited that they do not need to meet the rigid criteria he imposed upon them

in order to be real. One such view is expressed by Jenkins (2008a: 9). Arguing that

analytical concepts must be ‘grounded in the observable realities of the human world’, he

provides a more flexible definition that permits recognition of groups as more than simply

cognitive: ‘the minimal reality of a group is that its members know it exists and that they

12

belong to it.’ (ibid: 12) This dispenses with requirements of fixed boundaries and in-group

similarity.

Accepting that groups exist, social scientists recognise that ethnicity provides a fundamental

basis for identity construction. Although overlapping with and similar to race, it is regarded

as having a stronger component of assertion whilst race is produced more by assignment

(Cornell and Hartmann, 2007). Ethnic identities can also be confused with nationality (as

observed in this study) however, unlike the latter, they do not imply the sharing of political

and cultural boundaries (Eriksen, 2002: 7).

Developing from earlier (often essentialist) anthropological notions of ‘tribe’, ethnicity

became a popular subject of study in the 1960’s. Barth (1969) presented an influential

examination of the concept and rejected conventional views of ethnicity as biologically

determined and unchanging. He stated that ethnic groups were fluid and variable,

produced through social interaction and involving negotiation at their boundaries. He

redirected attention from the cultural attributes of groups to processes of boundary

creation and maintenance and emphasised the active element of self description by group

members as a defining feature of ethnicity. He also recognised that culture was a product of

group processes.

Building on Barth’s model, many other authors have made further contributions to a

theoretical understanding of ethnicity and explored some of its characteristics. Cohen

(1982) applies it to an ethnographic study of culture within rural communities at the

margins of Britain and uses it to argue for an appreciation of diversity. Baumann (1999: 25)

proposes that essentialist ‘photocopy’ conceptions of culture are often woven through

13

dominant views of national, ethnic and religious identities. Eriksen (2002), examines

ethnicity in relation to nationalism and demonstrates that ethnicity is ‘a dynamic and

shifting aspect of social relations’.

An issue which has provoked much debate is the persistence of ethnicity over time.

Reflecting on this ‘puzzle’, Cornell and Hartmann (2007) review the historical development

of ideas on the subject. They examine theories of ethnic and racial change over time and

place, including Park’s (1926/1950) model of assimilation. This predicted the declining

importance of ethnicity for a variety of social and economic reasons. Gans (1952, cited in

Staub, 1989: 34) shared this view and dismissed ethnic behaviour in third generation

migrants as purely symbolic and nostalgic, but having no real meaning to those performing

them, suggesting assimilation was inevitable. A common sense version of this idea has

persisted in the media and popular forms of writing; Alibhai Brown (2001: 84) describes it as

a ‘fable’ that many ‘wishful and naive people’ subscribe to. She outlines the general process

of adaptation that is supposed to occur: ‘by the third generation, acceptance is complete,

the problems are over.’ However, as evidence of the increasing salience of ethnic identities

has accumulated, other theorists have attempted to explain its continuing relevance in

contemporary societies. Some hypothesise that ethnicity is a product of structural

inequalities and continuing racial discrimination, often involving migration (e.g. Mason,

2000). Others view ethnicity as more actively asserted and used as a resource by groups to

claim power, or express cultural difference. Addressing issues of structure and agency,

Cornell and Hartmann (2007) view ethnic identities as outcomes of both external

circumstances – the ‘construction sites’ of ethnicity - and the active (internal) processes

which members engage in to ‘make’ ethnic groups. They distinguish between ‘thick’ and

14

‘thin’ ethnicities (p. 79), defining the former as ‘being’ - identities which tend to

comprehensively organise the daily routines and experiences of those who practice them,

and the latter as ‘feeling’ – identities which are shaped more by other aspects of the world

they live in, such as class, gender and occupation. They acknowledge that over time, ethnic

identities usually change from thicker to thinner, although this is not the only direction they

can take. Like Eriksen (1993), they observe that ethnic groups are not homogenous entities;

within any ethnic group, the degree to which an ethnic identity is asserted may vary, with

some individuals seeing it as important and others regarding it as less significant.

In debates over changes between generations, the discourse of age cohorts (e.g. Hareven,

1978) is often employed. This is based on the idea of historical and social changes marking

each generation as different from preceding ones, producing a distinctive collective identity.

Eriksen (1993: 63) describes the children of first generation migrants as ‘ethnic anomalies’, a

term borrowed from Douglas (1966, cited in Eriksen, 1993) and shows how they may resist

pressure to define themselves in unitary ways and instead claim affiliation to more than one

group. This ‘fuzzy’ ethnicity is the subject of further contestation; writers such as Anwar

(1998: 148) propose that younger generations of British Asians born in the host country

experience divided loyalties, leading to tension and conflict within families and ethnic

communities. Others such as Archer (2001) and Dwyer (2000) talk more optimistically of

‘new’ and ‘hybrid’ identities, constructed in ways which enable individuals to negotiate

between multiple identities and respond to context. They define identity as fluid and

situational but also able to combine and intermingle to produce new hybrid forms.

Although relying on a biological metaphor which has essentialist overtones, hybridity does

not imply that the ‘stock’ on which new identities are crafted is necessarily ‘pure’ - the

15

identities of earlier generations can also be seen as outcomes of continuous change over

time and having ‘fuzzy’ boundaries themselves. Nor does it necessarily imply that hybridity

is a recent phenomenon produced by globalisation and modernity. Concerns over these

possible implications lead some authors (e.g. Jenkins, personal communication) to reject the

concept of hybridity. However this account of ethnicity does have value in providing new

insights into what it means to belong to an ethnic minority in a particular place and time.

Focusing upon the ways that individuals reinterpret old identities to create new identities,

hybridity offers a useful metaphor for analysing change.

My research is thus premised on a theoretical understanding of ethnic identity as

constructed and situational, variable across generations and founded on multiple identities

mixing together in complex ways to produce hybrids. Although often presented as

immutable1, ethnic identities can be contested and reshaped both by external forces and

the actions of groups and individuals. These characteristics are emphasised in the definition

of ethnic identity proposed by Jenkins (2008b: 10) and applied in this study. Ethnicity is

based on ‘a shared belief in common descent’, produced when individuals act as a collective

and employing cultural ‘stuff’ to form perceptions of similarity and difference which in turn

define group boundaries. These can be changed through processes of self-assertion and

categorisation by others. Consequently ethnic identities are never completed but must be

viewed as unfinished and continuously responding to internal and external forces.

Within this study Yemeni-ness and Britishness are treated as ethnic identities, although I

acknowledge that Britishness, in the UK context, is a category of national identity. However,

1 Jenkins (2008a) distinguishes between certain types of identity such as gender and self which are formed in the early stages of a child’s life, and therefore more resistant to change later on. Ethnicity can also, in certain circumstances, be regarded as a primary identity although this does not deny the possibility of change.

16

since interviewees talked about both in the same way and made direct comparisions

between them, I have given them an equal status. Other authors have also adopted this

position (Hussain and Bagguley, 2005; Saeed et al, 1999).

Empirical studies of ethnicity

Recent research in Britain has explored many different dimensions of ethnicity and the ways

in which they are interrelated or overlap with race and nationality. They focus mainly on

asserted definitions of identity and include features such as religion, gender, class and

culture. Although concentrating mainly on British Pakistanis, they have provided useful

material to inform both the methodology and content of this investigation. The literature

also includes the impact of the researcher’s own ethnicity in studies of ethnic minorities

(Archer, 2001, Dwyer, 2006).

Various writers have investigated identity construction at the national and supra-national

level. Saeed et al (1999) point to the salience of dual nationality and also religious

definitions among Scottish Pakistanis, emphasising their complexity. Hussain and Bagguley

(2005) examine how the concept of citizenship allowed individuals to overcome racism and

exclusion, noting that Britishness offers a broader, more multicultural understanding of

belonging whereas English identities are viewed as more exclusionary. They also observed a

distinctive difference between first and second generation interviewees with the second

generation asserting their British identity more strongly whilst the first generation still

regarded themselves as ‘being in a foreign country’ (ibid: 419). Nagel and Staeheli (2007)

explore supranational Arabic and religious identities among community activists involved

with ‘Arab-oriented organisations’ (ibid: 8). They noted that Arabness was seen as a more

17

politically neutral identity that avoids some of the connotations of religious extremism

associated with religious identities, with interviewees choosing to present themselves as

British Arabs rather than British Muslims. However other writers report that religion plays a

significant role in identity construction. Jacobson (1997) and Archer (2001) present findings

from case studies which illustrate the centrality of Islam to British Pakistani identities and its

importance in defining roles for individuals. Jacobson notes that religion is often prioritised

above ethnic identities and seen as having more clearly defined borders. Philips (2006)

argues for the need to appreciate diversity within ethnic groups, reflecting differences in

origins, class, education, age, gender and other factors.

Culture is another important arena for identity construction. Burdsey (2006) illustrates how

conflicting racial and national identities are expressed through sporting affiliations.

Employing the notion of hybridity, Dwyer (1999a, 1999b, 2000) explores linkages between

gender, religious and ethnic identities in young British Pakistani women, expressed through

dress and behaviour. She notes the assertion of new religious identities based on the

informed, conscious adoption of Islamic values. She also argues that gendered roles are

often reinforced by cultural practices (2000), with notions of family honour employed

strategically to reproduce parental concepts of culture.

Collectively these studies emphasise the constructed and complex nature of ethnic

identities, with overlapping and different factors combining to produce new and on-going

forms of identification. They illustrate negotiation and contestation processes as well as

highlighting boundaries. They also make a strong case for the recognition of heterogeneity

within ethnic and religious categories (Kahani-Hopkins and Hopkins, 2002; Nagel and

Staeheli, 2007) and for more inclusive definitions of Britishness (Philips, 2006). However,

18

whilst they provide ideas to inform my own research, they do not deal with the

particularities of being Yemeni in Sheffield.

Yemenis in Sheffield and elsewhere

Information about Yemenis as an ethnic minority in Britain is extremely limited. Halliday

(1992) provides a historical overview of how Yemeni men first came to Britain and settled in

several industrial cities during the twentieth century. He asserts that Yemenis remained a

distinctive group, largely because they chose to remain ‘invisible’ to, and separate from, the

host society. Focusing on Yemeni men in Sheffield, Searle (2007) argues that the ‘myth of

return’ persisted amongst them for considerably longer than for migrants from other

countries. This ‘sojourner’ mentality meant that there was little incentive for men to bring

their families to join them in Britain. Consequently Yemeni women and children did not

begin arriving in Britain until the 1980’s and 90’s, once it became clear that Yemenis were

‘here to stay’. Searle and Shaif (1991) note changes in identities over time, with young

second generation Yemenis becoming more conscious of their ethnicity and using it

strategically to create collective organisations. They describe them as no longer ‘obedient’

to the white majority and willing to claim rights that they had previously been denied.

Outside the British context, Staub (1989) presents an ethnographic study of Yemenis in New

York and explores a variety of identity positions. Ranging from the more exclusive - family,

village and tribe - to more inclusive ones such as regional, national and religious, he notes

the impact of continued migration on ethnic identities, suggesting that contact with what he

terms ‘Old World’ identities renews a sense of difference and contributes to the

maintenance of ethnic boundaries.

19

Within Sheffield there is a small amount of ‘grey’ literature on the Yemeni community. This

states that the population was under 2,000 in 2001 (Sheffield City Council, 2006) but local

Yemeni organisations suggest a figure of around 5,000 (personal communication: Abtisam

Mohammed). Other documents (Assinani, 2002; Mohammed and Makmahi, 2001)

demonstrate that as a group Yemenis experience high levels of deprivation and are still

marginalised and excluded from mainstream society. They point to evidence of poor

educational attainment and higher than average rates of unemployment as symptoms of

disadvantage experienced by young people. Written by local Yemeni activists, many of

them young themselves, these reports provide insight into the feelings of frustration and

‘otherness’ expressed by many individuals.

Radio programmes (Dein and Burman, 2004) and oral histories (Wilson, 2007) have also

been useful sources of information. These have provided historical and social context for

this study and indicated themes to pursue in interviews. However they mostly focus on the

experiences of men and there is almost no information about Yemeni women, particularly

those from second and third generation families. I have therefore chosen to focus my

research on identity processes within this group. My aim is to provide a contextual

understanding of the construction processes shaping identity amongst a small group of

British Yemeni women in Sheffield. Justification for this is rooted in the need to understand

the dynamics of ethnic identification processes within the collective and to appreciate

diversity in order to contribute to current policy debates on multiculturalism and pluralism.

These do not make sense if conducted in an environment in which groups are seen as

homogenous and unchanged by either context or collective action.

My research aim is to answer the question:

20

- How do second and third generation British Yemeni women negotiate between the

different ethnic, national and religious categories of Yemeni, British and Muslim?

Research questions are:

- How do individuals construct their identities and what do they consist of?

- What aspects are asserted and what are ascribed?

- How do ethnic, religious and gendered identities interact and how do individuals

negotiate between them?

- How are identities shaped by contextual factors?

- How do the identities of later generations differ from those of their parents?

21

Chapter Three: Methodology

Throughout this study I have adopted a constructivist approach to identity. Consistent with

this position, I recognise that knowledge is situated and constructed in the context of

interaction between the researcher and her subjects, and therefore a ‘co-production’

(Mason, 2002: 63). This implies an understanding of identity as something which, although

variable and contingent, can be understood through the meanings given to it by human

subjects, and thus investigated by in-depth methods in which the behaviour, attitudes and

values of individual can be interpreted by the researcher. My chosen methodology was

therefore based on interviewing as a way of investigating the self-representations of my

research subjects. The focus was on individual understandings of identity; how they saw

themselves in relation to others and how they thought those others positioned them.

Interviews were used as a way of gaining access to self-perceptions, providing a means of

exploring some aspects of identity not accessible by other methods. A semi-structured

approach offered the potential to investigate issues flexibly and in depth; although a broad

range of question headings were drawn up in advance, interviewees were given the

opportunity to talk about things that mattered to them and in a sequence which varied

individually. An additional advantage of interviewing was that it offered a means of

gathering other forms of information – visual and verbal clues such as appearance and

intonation of speech - on how individuals positioned and represented themselves.

One disadvantage of interviewing in comparison with participant observation is that it

prioritises attitudes and opinions over actions, in other words ‘saying’ over ‘doing’. This can 22

problematic when subjects are invited to speak about ‘being’ and ‘feeling’ rather than

researching how their values and attitudes are enacted. In order to find a balance between

the two, my research included (reported) practical actions as well as opinions. Questions

were therefore designed to focus on personal experience as a means of finding out how

participants viewed themselves and the world they inhabit. Interviewees were encouraged

to describe past events and actions as well as their subjective readings of such occasions in

order to access expressions of their identity.

In a study of Yemenis in New York, Staub (1989) defines ethnic identities as situational and

performed products of social interaction. Therefore identities are never fixed but

determined in relation to whom individuals are interacting with, influenced by the context

in which they are located. My research follows a similar approach and attempts to explore

participants’ own understandings of their ethnic identities within a particular geographical

location and timeframe, shaped by the broader circumstances in which they are produced.

My findings are therefore specific to their context and cannot be treated as a general

statement of what British-Yemeni identities ‘look’ like. Additionally, my enquiry was limited

to certain elements of identity that I felt most relevant to the experiences of second and

third generation interviewees in an urban British context. I did not include questions about

tribal or regional identities, nor, at a more detailed level, those around ‘usra’ (patrilineal

descent group) and village. Instead my study focused on broader ethnic and national

identities of Yemeni-ness, Britishness, and, to a limited extent, Arabness. It also covered

religious identity, seeking to explore how this related to other identities within the complex

web of other factors such as gender, age and individual histories.

23

The issue of class and its influence on identity is also absent from this study. Most

interviewees come from working class backgrounds with fathers and grandfathers employed

in the steel industry as labourers. However, because of their own anomalous position

within both British and Yemeni society, it is difficult to define exactly which class they now

belong to. I have therefore not included it in this study but acknowledge it is another factor

shaping identities.

Overall this study is my own interpretation of how individuals perceive themselves to be

located in the social world and can therefore be criticised as partial and subjective. Taking a

pragmatic approach to this problem, I accept that the representations participants made to

me during interviews cannot be treated as ‘the truth’ but can be used to construct a

‘positioned’ objectivity (Sen, 1993) which is fallible and open to revision, and which can

contribute to objective knowledge, strengthened by the positioned views of others.

Access and sampling

In order to conduct an in-depth study of identity in my chosen group, my aim was to

interview between 10 and 12 women who fitted the following broad criteria: they should be

second or third generation British Yemenis, aged between 20 and 30, and able to speak

English. Age was important as I wanted to locate individuals who had made the transition to

adulthood (defined as either working or married) and who had lived in Britain both before

and after September 11th 2001. I did not define my sampling needs more precisely because

I felt it was necessary to remain flexible when attempting to contact what are considered to

be a ‘hard to reach’ group.

24

Although I had previously had contact with some of my interviewees (whilst working in

community development projects in Sheffield), this did not mean that access to my

intended group was guaranteed and it required careful negotiation. As mentioned by Searle

(2007), first generation Yemenis in Sheffield had a reputation of seeking to remain ‘invisible’

and my own experiences of working with Yemeni women suggested that many were keen to

avoid situations which might put them in a public domain outside those they normally

operate in. Early discussions with gate keepers also indicated that it might be extremely

difficult to find individuals who would be willing to participate. However I was able to

overcome this through personal contact, in particular with one interviewee who assisted me

greatly in finding all others. This could be described as a variant of a snowballing technique:

my lead contact approached other women she knew and asked them on my behalf. Trust

and word of mouth were thus important issues, with personal recommendation seen as the

only way to find recruits (as noted by Devine and Heath, 1999: 72). Whilst I was able to

specify criteria for the sort of person I wanted to engage with, this meant that I did not

choose who to interview. However, having interviewees selected by someone else

ultimately proved to be an advantage, and introduced me to a group of women with a

particular subset of shared characteristics. All ten participants worked for the same

organisation which, for the purpose of this study, I will refer to as the Arabic Support

Association (ASA). They were thus distinctive from most other Yemeni women in terms of

their levels of education, abilities to express themselves in English and the roles they

performed in public. These similarities gave me a stronger basis in which to explore within-

group diversity.

25

Altogether eleven interviews were conducted with participants, ranging between 35

minutes and two hours. Most lasted for approximately an hour and a half. This created a

large volume of material to transcribe, an issue factored into my decision to interview only

ten women. All interviews took place in the Arabic Support Association, in a room provided

by staff there to ensure privacy during our conversations. Participants appeared relaxed

and at ease during interviews. Several talked for much longer than anticipated and seemed

willing to express their views on a wide range of subjects. One woman was interviewed

twice; by virtue of her position within the organisation, she was able to give an overview of

some of the recent changes happening within the Yemeni community in Sheffield and thus

played the roles of both interviewee and key informant.

Interviews were digitally recorded and transcribed before being analysed. Transcripts were

manually coded under a set of themed headings which were broadly related to my research

questions and refined further on subsequent readings of transcripts. This enabled me to be

responsive in my analysis to issues raised by interviewees, allowing material beyond the

original scope of the study to be included rather than excluded. Analysis of this data then

focused upon the different ways in which ethnicity was expressed, the perceived boundaries

of these and links with other identities such as gender and religion. For each dimension of

ethnic identity, I examined the range of opinions expressed by interviewees and searched

for patterns and consistency in their answers. Broad notions of collective identities were

then determined from individual positions, building up a picture of what Yemeni-ness and

Britishness were thought to consist. During this stage I constantly referred to original

interview scripts to check the context of what interviewees said and to ensure that my

interpretations were based on clear evidence. What emerged is a description of both

26

individual and collective identity, based on my own understandings of what was expressed

and enacted in the interview situation.

Ethical issues and the position of the researcher

Preparations were made to deal with ethical issues in advance of starting field work;

consent forms were designed and I agreed to conduct all interviews in the participants’

place of work. This offered a greater degree of privacy than their homes, where the

presence of other family members might inhibit conversation on certain topics. At the start

of each interview I explained the process and their rights in some detail. I did not treat this

as a mere formality but as something that participants needed to understand in order to

give them a sense of control over what they told me and allay any fears of exploitation –

several women were anxious that the recordings of their voices were not kept after the

research was completed. I therefore emphasised the contractual nature of their consent;

that I would treat all the information they provided with respect. This was essential to build

a relationship of trust and to ensure that data generated from interviews would be both

valid and of a high quality. However, as interviews progressed it became apparent that

anonymity and confidentiality were even more important than initially expected. Within the

small and discrete community of Yemenis in Sheffield, it might be possible to identify

individuals from comments they made and therefore, in writing this dissertation, risk

putting them in an unfavourable position. To avoid this I have changed interviewees’ names

and also written my findings and conclusions in a way that disguises their identities. An

early draft of findings was also checked by my key informant to ensure anonymity and make

sure that sensitive issues were treated in a way that did not provoke offense.

27

I also needed to exercise confidentiality in the way I treated certain issues. All participants

talked about sensitive and personal subjects such as religious beliefs, marriage and what

might be regarded as ‘deviant’ behaviour which broke with norms of acceptability among

Sheffield Yemenis . I have therefore had to make choices, often guided by participants

themselves, about what information to include and what to exclude. This was done on the

basis of what possible consequences might follow if individuals were identified and linked to

certain opinions or actions. In order to respect my interviewees’ trust in me, I have given

this utmost priority, although balanced against presenting what I consider to be a fair

interpretation of what they told me.

As a white, middle aged and middle class woman from a completely different background to

the women I interviewed, I acknowledge that my position and my own ethnicity as the

researcher in this study will have had an effect on the research process, notably in how

participants respond to me and what they tell me (discussed by authors such as Archer,

2001 and Dwyer, 2006). Cornell and Hartmann (2007: 88) refer to ‘the invisibility of racial

dominance’ as an issue which needs to be made explicit when studying race and ethnicity.

Marcus (2001: 109) similarly points out the dangers of creating ‘deformed identities’ as a

consequence of bringing an ‘orientalist’ perspective (first defined by Edward Said) to the

study of ‘the other’, and that this can lead to them being seen as alien and exotic, notably

when dealing with issues that have been constructed as such in public discourses. In this

study apparent cultural differences were areas which required some sensitivity and

awareness. Although participants spoke willingly about themselves and their lives, they did

so in the context of negative stereotypes expressed by the majority (non-Muslim)

population about Islam and the treatment of women, particularly around issues such as

28

arranged marriage and submission to patriarchal authority. They were clearly conscious of

this generally hostility, as indicated by the way in which they talked about terrorism and

Islamic fundamentalism during interviews. Whilst my religious identity remained hidden

from them, they must have attempted to guess my position - whether sympathetic or

critical of Islam - and this will have influenced what they said. In spite of my obvious

racial/ethnic identity as white and therefore different from them, several interviewees

openly related experiences of forced marriage and personal struggles against collective

definitions of their ethnicity. This suggests that I was trusted and treated as someone who

would not sensationalise information confided in them. During interviews I made efforts to

engage with them as equals and as professional women, and to find a balance between

sympathy and distance. McDowell (2005: 199) describes this as “tread(ing) the line

between scholarly observer and empathetic listener,” likening her task to that of being “a

cross between a detective, a translator, an inquisitive stranger and a sympathetic friend.”

This is the approach I have tried to follow in my field work.

Whilst it is impossible to avoid completely the dynamics of a situation in which power and

racial stereotyping are likely to be present, there was evidence to suggest that I was

successful in my efforts to avoid being seen as ‘typically’ white. All the women interviewed

talked about sensitive and personal experiences, regardless of whether they knew me in

advance or not. My connection with a recent public exhibition which portrayed Yemenis in

a positive light may also have helped me to establish trust. Experience of living in an Arabic

speaking country has also given me some familiarity with certain cultural practices seen as

Arab; this has also helped me to view my subjects not as ‘alien’ but rather as individuals that

I could engage with on an equal basis.

29

Reflecting more broadly on the issue of the researcher’s ethnicity, I acknowledge that my

own personal background has shaped my interests; questions asked in interviews and my

interpretations of answers are likely to be formed as a result of my own ethnocentric

perspective. However this does not invalidate findings if they are approached as contextual.

Whilst recognising that the differences between myself and my interviewees in terms of

class, power relations, age and religion will affect my relationship with them, and therefore

what they tell me, I argue that an ‘outsider’ perspective can generate a different and (if care

is taken) legitimate set of knowledge about the group under investigation.

My position as a woman researching other women also impacted on the interview situation.

It enabled me to gain access to a group who might not respond to male researchers in a

one-to-one situation and assisted me in asking questions on sensitive issues. Although not

employing feminist theory in this study, my position throughout has been feminist, in aiming

to give a voice to an underrepresented group from an ethnic minority. Previous experience

of interviewing first generation Yemenis in Sheffield (Wilson, 2007) has also given me an

awareness of their collective history and a strong sense of empathy with my subjects.

Adding to this, a brief trip to Yemen in 2007, specifically to visit the region which most of my

interviewees originate from, has given me an advantage in understanding the significance of

some of the issues they raised in interviews.

30

Chapter Four: Findings

Altogether ten women were interviewed for this study. Ranging in age from 20 to 31, most

were born in Yemen and arrived in Britain as children between the ages of two and twelve.

Only two individuals were born in Sheffield. Half the group were second generation and the

other half were third generation. Almost all had fathers or grandfathers who had worked in

the steel industry.

Within the group there was some variation in terms of marital and family status. Six women

were married and five of them had children. Of the remaining four, two were single and

two were divorced. All those who were married, or had been married, had experienced

arranged marriages, although with different degrees of ‘arrangement’, ranging from mutual

acceptance to forced.

Whilst there was some diversity in terms of educational attainment, all interviewees had

attended secondary school in Britain and nine had studied at further education colleges. In

spite of breaks to get married or have children, five had completed part time degrees at

university as mature students. Several women had obtained vocational qualifications in

subjects related to their work.

Asserted identities

Within the group, dual ethnic identities of Yemeni and British were asserted by all

participants. Although there was variation in the meanings attached to these and the ways

31

in which they expressed them, interviewees claimed both simultaneously and with

confidence.

Being Yemeni

Yemeni identity was generally expressed through aspects such as physical and emotional

ties to Yemen, language and cultural practices, often closely linked to religion. Although all

ten interviewees accepted this as their inherited identity, based on a sense of shared roots,

opinions diverged as to how willingly they embraced this category. Most women expressed

strong feelings of being Yemeni. For Aisha, being Yemeni was ‘just who I am,’ an almost

unquestionable acknowledgement of something natural and immutable deriving from

where she was born. In contrast Yasmin accepted it reluctantly: ‘I call myself Yemeni

because other people want me to.’ She spoke openly of being pressurised to conform to

the expectations of other Yemenis but pointed out that she was ‘a different Yemeni girl,’

who wished to be respected for ‘being herself’. Zeinab felt her Yemeni-ness was of little

significance to her: ‘It’s not really (important)...it’s just where I come from, the country.’

She described herself as having ‘little bits of culture that keep me Yemeni,’ and was keen to

emphasise that she felt more strongly British. These women felt that they did not fit into

the category of being ‘typically’ Yemeni but instead were reformulating their own meanings

of this identity.

Language was seen as a vital component of ethnic identity, particularly amongst

interviewees with children. Although some women acknowledged their own linguistic

limitations, they recognised the importance of language in perpetuating ethnic identity.

They were keen to ensure their children could speak Arabic and articulated strategies to

32

make this happen. These included taking children to ‘madrassas’ after school and to Yemen

to visit family there. Wafa described how she felt a personal sense of responsibility in this

task: ‘...if my daughter reached 18 and she didn’t know how to read or speak Arabic, I’d be

so ashamed of myself.’ Even those who were less enthusiastically Yemeni regarded Arabic as

an important signifier of their ethnic identity.

An appreciation of family origins was also seen as an essential part of Yemeni identity. Aisha

spoke about how she talked with her children from an early age: ‘I try to grow this thing in

them, who they are and what they should be.’ Lubna felt this was important for future

generations also: ‘I want them to know...who they are and where they’re from and make

sure that when they have kids, they don’t forget where they come from, even though we

live in a Westernised country.’

Being British

Alongside claims to be Yemeni, all participants asserted a British identity as well. However

opinions varied on how meaningful it was to them. Wafa described herself as ‘just a Yemeni

person from Yemen living in Britain, like somebody British living in Spain.’ For her being

British was simply about having a passport. In opposition to this, Zeinab stated that ‘the

only thing that keeps us different from an English British person is that we have our religion.

So I really do see myself as British, I work, I drive, I can go out shopping...I think I’m more

British and I just have a little Yemeni in me.’ In between these extremes, Aisha identified

herself as firmly British but also ‘not living in our home country.’

Britishness was generally expressed in terms of behaviour and values. Behaviour that was

referred to as British included working, studying, driving, and having the freedom to visit

33

friends or go shopping. Expressing opinions and a sense of independence were also seen as

British. Huda states ‘I speak my mind, that’s very British. Opinionated is British, very strong

willed is British...I’m not a timid person.’ For Mariam being British was about ‘the freedom

to choose what you want to do’. A sense of equality between the sexes and understanding

their rights were also seen as British. Samira described her relationship with her husband as

‘50-50. The way we’re brought up [in Britain], we like to be fair. Some girls [from Yemen]

go, “I’m going to twist my husband round my little finger.” But not us. Have to be fair,

that’s the English side.’ For Yasmin British laws offered protection against threats of being

sent back to Yemen to be married.

Working and studying were both viewed as important British characteristics, often placed in

direct opposition to the behaviour of women in Yemen. Although most interviewees stated

that having a career and qualifications had not been major goals in their teenage years, they

recognised that these had become more important to them as adults. In particular working

was seen as offering independence and gave individuals a sense of self worth. For Mariam,

it was a ‘passion’ in her life and a source of identity and confidence. For others it held less

significance but brought financial benefits, friendships and freedom to go outside the home.

Being Muslim

Religion was deeply embedded in individual articulations of ethnic identity, with religious

identity prioritised by some as more important than Yemeni. Most women referred to Islam

as providing a guide to all aspects of their lives and it permeated much of the discussion on

their actions and attitudes. Fatima defined it as ‘the way I live.’ Another spoke of Islam as

her identity, something that gave her security. Like others, they asserted a self conscious

34

and voluntary religious identity, defined as different from their parents’ understanding of

Islam which they saw as based more on tradition and culture. They made a clear distinction

between the two, presenting their faith as incontrovertible whilst viewing the cultural

practices of their parents as something that could be questioned and even rejected, based

more on ignorance and tradition – termed a ‘village’ mentality by some. In this respect

they are adopting what Dwyer (2000: 482) describes as a ‘new Muslim’ identity, using their

superior knowledge of the Koran to win arguments with their parents, gain rights and

exercise greater control in their lives whilst at the same time maintaining an image of

respectability and conformity. Islamic authority was invoked to justify working and

studying, resist parental pressure to contribute money for certain family projects (e.g.

building a house in Yemen) and challenge decisions around marriage.

Although most women presented themselves as practicing Muslims, this was not universal.

One woman stated she was not Muslim although she felt that she had to display some signs

of religious observance in order to be ‘acceptable’ to other Yemenis. Another described how

she was ‘growing into’ her faith and gradually accepting more of the rules: ‘I know my roles

as a woman, I know the duties...I’m still learning bit by bit...(but) I’ll do things in the future,

from my heart, not when you’re forcing me.’ 2 Both women recognised that they were

challenging what were seen by others as absolute boundaries of religious and ethnic

identities.

Aspects of culture were often woven into religious identities. Being able to read and speak

Arabic was considered vital to understanding the Koran as well as performing a

communicative function. Dress was also used to express a religious identity, with most

2 The ‘forcing’ she mentioned referred to pressure from parents to conform to traditional religious values. 35

interviewees adopting a headscarf. However some participants also displayed a degree of

‘hybridity’ (Dwyer (1999b), with Western and Arab fashions combined to produce a

distinctive style of clothing that challenged traditional standards yet at the same time met

requirements of female modesty and propriety. Dress was thus a marker of individuality

but also an issue which reinforced ethnic, religious and gendered identities.

Whilst many interviewees emphasised that wearing a headscarf was voluntary, the only

woman who did not wear one suggested that women were being pressurised to conform to

cultural norms and that it was not simply a matter of personal choice. She described an

environment in which a strong collective sense of appropriate dress for Yemeni women

created conditions in which dissent was difficult. She related situations in which her attire

was interpreted as challenging conventional views of respectable feminine and Muslim

behaviour, provoking disapproval and unwanted attention from men. As a result she

expresses a strong desire to move to another city or even another country to escape such

restrictions and construct a new identity, free from religious and ethnic impositions.

Being Arab...or not

Whilst clearly linked to religious and ethnic identities, opinions on Arab identity were

extremely variable. Although many spoke about themselves as Arabs, they defined this in

diverse ways. For some it was purely a linguistic feature, something they held in common

with other Arabic speakers and for others it had a geographical meaning. Several described

it as unimportant and one woman spoke of it as the equivalent of ’European’ in relation to

British rather than a unifying concept with shared attributes. It was never expressed as a

political concept. This is contrary to the findings of Nagel & Staeheli (2007) who propose

36

that Arab identities are employed by individuals as more politically neutral than Muslim

ones, thus offering a way to avoid negative stereotypes associated with essentialist readings

of Islam as ‘backwards’ and in opposition to British secular culture. Although many women

expressed concerns at the way in which Islam was portrayed in the media, this did not seem

to influence their own definitions of themselves as Muslims.

Ascribed identities

Participants recognised that, in certain situations, their own sense of who they were was

challenged by those around them, forcing them to reassess and redefine their position. This

was true for both British and Yemeni identities.

Even those women who felt strongly Yemeni acknowledged that when they were in Yemen,

they were often seen as different. Lubna described having a higher status and being

treated more favourably because of her Britishness. However Suha expressed it as a burden

based on false perceptions of wealth: ‘when you’re living here [Britain], Yemenis expect,

that’s it, you’re living in heaven and you can send money [back]. But it’s not easy like that,

that’s what I used to get when I lived in Yemen.’ Not being able to speak ‘village’ Arabic was

considered a sign of inauthenticity (Cornell and Hartmann, 2007; 95) whilst the reputations

of British Yemeni women as assertive and independent labelled them as ‘bad’ and immoral

in the eyes of relatives in Yemen.

All participants related experiences of not being seen as British in Britain. Many of them felt

this was the result of their decisions to wear a headscarf and were acutely aware that their

appearance marked them out as ‘different’ and threatening to some non-Muslims. They

described a variety of situations in which they felt hostility from others, received negative

37

comments or were treated differently. Following September 11th 2001, they all felt what

Cornell and Hartmann (2007: 200) termed ‘the warped logic of collective responsibility’

which pervaded their everyday lives and affected their sense of being part of British society.

Many expressed frustration at being unfairly categorised as fanatics and even terrorists

because of their appearance. Lubna stated ‘they look at me and they say, “Oh, she’s

wearing the hejab, she’s one of them. She thinks like them.” They read the book by its

cover but they don’t actually try to open it and see the person there.’ Yasmin said ‘Just

because a white guy kills someone, does that mean you’re going to kill someone? Just

because they kill someone and they’re Muslim...I’m not like them!’ Amongst some

interviewees this provoked feelings of anxiety and uncertainty for their future in Britain.

Several interviewees distinguished between English (as white) and British (as multicultural)

although for others these were interchangeable terms. However all participants were clear

that they were different from white British women. Reflecting on what it meant to be

British, Mariam recognised there were different types of Britishness: ‘The concept of

Britishness is really obscure. I don’t see myself as part of the British culture which, I think, is

going to pubs and clubs. I’m not part of that culture. But I still see it as going to the park

when it’s sunny, having chips, that’s British, just chilling out.’

38

Interaction between identities

Yemeni and British

Participants acknowledged that they switched between their ethnic identities in different

situations, often depending on the interplay between how they saw themselves and how

others perceived them. Many women described the paradoxical experience of feeling more

Yemeni in Britain and more British in Yemen, largely as a result of being viewed as ‘different’

by the majority population in both locations. These attitudes did not stop some

interviewees from feeling a sense of belonging whilst in Yemen. Others felt like tourists and

were desperate to get back to their homes in Sheffield. Some reacted by defining Yemeni

women as ‘too feminine’, manipulative and lacking in independence. In response to

disapproval from female relatives in Yemen, Zeinab dismissed them as ‘just basically

housewives who cook, clean and produce babies for their husbands.’ However participants

were very aware of differences between ‘village’ Yemenis and urban ones, regarding

themselves as similar in some ways to urban Yemeni women. They related how women

living in cities like Aden were often able to work, unlike their village counterparts who were

described as having more traditional lifestyles and fewer freedoms. Several talked about

these differences as products of class and education. They suggested that urban society in

Yemen has changed and women now have a higher status there. One woman pointed out

that if some women in Yemen are allowed to work, then this refutes her parents’ arguments

against her working – their position is seen as ‘backward’ and old fashioned. Thus

knowledge of changes ‘back home’ was employed, alongside their rights as British citizens,

to gain greater autonomy and freedom in their lives in Britain. A similar situation of

39

hybridity was observed around marriage, with participants asserting identities as both

Yemeni and British to challenge cultural boundaries.

The ways in which interviewees defined their ethnic identities suggested that, although both

can be employed at different times, a persistent feeling of being strongly Yemeni was often

matched to feeling less British and vice versa. Context and individual responses to

situations played a role in shaping such identities. Contextual factors such as discrimination

and racism were described by most interviewees as influencing how they saw themselves,

with negative reactions from the mainstream society appearing to strengthen ethnic

identifications as Yemeni. This pattern could also operate in the opposite direction; those

women expressing a firm British identity were most resistant to the traditional norms of

behaviour and sought to redefine their identities as not ‘typically’ Yemeni.

Contrary to models predicting changes in identity across generations (e.g. Piore ,1979, cited

in Cornell and Hartmann, 2007: 245), there was no obvious difference between second and

third generation participants in the ways in which they expressed their British and Yemeni

identities, or the degree to which they felt one or the other. These did not even seem to

relate to the age at which individuals arrived in Britain; despite spending most of her

childhood in Yemen, Yasmin – a second generation migrant - firmly claims her British

identity as the stronger one whilst Wafa, also second generation, regards her Yemeni

identity as more deeply embedded, although she came to Britain at the age of six. All

participants had spent their teenage years in Britain and it might be assumed that the

shared experience of adapting to life here would result in similar forms of ethnic identity.

Instead opinions seemed to vary more in relation to personal experiences with event s and

family circumstances playing a significant role in how individuals positioned themselves.

40

British but Muslim

Although most interviewees described themselves as British Muslims, they recognised that

their religious identity was often seen as challenging mainstream ideas of what it means to

be British, especially in the context of global events such as the September 11th attack on

the World Trade Centre and the 2005 bombings in London. In spite of hostile reactions from

some non-Muslims, they continued to retain a strong allegiance to Muslim dress codes.

Rather than being a political act of resistance to oppression from the dominant majority,

this was presented as a conscious and private decision to commit to their faith and prioritise

it over other issues. They therefore emphasised the voluntary adoption of the headscarf as

purely religious, symbolic of their determination to commit to their faith whilst at the same

time positioning themselves in opposition to fundamentalist interpretations of Islam.

Several were also concerned to express their religious identity against stereotypes of

Muslim women as oppressed and coerced into assuming a dress code enforced by others,

usually male. However Yasmin’s account of resistance and subsequent harassment by

Yemeni men suggests that enforcement is practiced and that there is limited scope to

publicly define herself as ‘British but not Muslim’ within a Yemeni context. In order to

escape from this pressure, she was prepared to reject her ethnic identity as Yemeni and set

herself apart from the collective. This made her distinctively different from others in the

group.

Gender

Accounts of ethnic and religious identities in this group are clearly entwined with issues of

gender. Participants talked about themselves as Muslim, Yemeni and British women with

41

conversations often centred on issues around marriage and appropriate female behaviour.

In spite of evidence of controls operating to reinforce ideals of gendered ethnic identity,

both issues emerged as sites of resistance and renegotiation of what it means to be Yemeni,

British, Muslim and female. These are discussed in more detail below.

Contextual factors in identity construction

A variety of contextual factors, both internal and external, were identified as influences on

identities. They often operated together and sometimes in contradictory ways to shape the

identities of individual women in diverse ways.

Internal forces: history and social institutions

Yemeni identity was frequently defined in relation to the historical context of migration,

with the collective experiences of first generation migrants to Sheffield forming a backdrop

to individual identities. There was a high level of awareness amongst most interviewees of

the conditions endured by parents and grandparents, building a sense of who they were and

also of how much better off they were from the previous generation. Anisa reflected on her

father’s life: ‘My dad worked so hard...all his life he lived struggling, working, earning money

to send abroad. And it wasn’t just for my mum and us, it was for his brother, his sisters, his

parents.’ This had motivated her to help others like her father through her work.

Social institutions were also important ‘construction sites’ ( Cornell and Hartmann, 2007:

187) of ethnic identity in this study, with marriage described as a way of maintaining intra-

group integrity and therefore perpetuating the ethnicity of the group. Surveillance was

42

observed to perform a similar task, by enforcing parental and collective expectations of

feminine respectability.

Evidence from individual accounts of marriage suggests that traditional practices are used to

prevent ethnic ‘dilution’ and keep group boundaries firmly in place – my key informant

confirmed this in a general discussion of arranged marriage within the Yemeni community in

Sheffield. By bringing in husbands from Yemen, rather than marrying daughters to British

Yemenis, the group overcomes a problem associated with the small size of the Yemeni

community in both Sheffield and Britain more generally, that of the risk of intermarriage

across group boundaries. This practice also ensures the persistence of language skills and

cultural values, based on the assumption that women will accede to the more conservative

values of their new husbands and that ties to Yemen will be renewed. Mariam expressed

this view: ‘I think if a woman marries a man from Yemen, he’ll be able to keep the tradition

with the children, they’ll grow up speaking Arabic, there will always be that link with Yemen.

Cos they see us as not being bothered with Yemen and moving away from it, whereas if they

got someone from the Yemen, that person will always have the link from Yemen with this

next generation because they’ll still want to see their family.’

Honour – shereff – is also bound up in parental strategies to marry daughters; by marrying

her off young, a woman’s sexual respectability and the family’s reputation are preserved.

Marriage is also viewed as a mechanism to ‘tame’ young women who are perceived as

acting in ways which damage their respectability. Yasmin expressed bitterness at the way

she was treated by other Yemenis because she refused to wear a headscarf; ‘They think I’m

bad. They don’t like the way I am. They think I’m too loud and I have to be sent back to

Yemen to get married.’

43

Surveillance is also noted by many interviewees as a way of regulating their behaviour and

ensuring that cultural and religious values are upheld. Although this phenomenon also

occurs in white communities (e.g. France, 2007: 54) it appeared similar to that described by

Dwyer (2000) where it is used strategically to maintain gendered ideals of ethnic identities.

Huda described how, as a teenager at school she had been drilled by her parents to avoid

friendships with boys as part of an ‘honour thing’ which would embarrass her family: ‘I knew

it was a shame if a boy comes and says, ’I love you.’ I used to get that at school....I used to

think, ‘Oh my God! Who are you to look at me in that way?...Why are you giving me a bad

name? If my Dad finds out, he’ll think I’m a slut!’ Others related everyday occasions of

attending college or social events such as weddings when they had to be careful to abide by

rules. Even as married women, the fear of malicious gossip and rumour mongering

continued to play a role in their lives. Samira commented, ‘If we go out too much, they’ll

just say, ‘Oh, she’s disrespectful, what’s she doing out ‘til night?’’

Dress was often the subject of attention, with the reputations of male relatives at stake as

well as individual women (also noted by Dwyer, 2000 and Archer, 2001). Huda described

the reaction of her husband when she wore western clothes in public: ‘[he said], “You need

to wear a scarf, you need to be a good role model for your new baby. You’re representing

me. I don’t want people to talk about you when you’re walking out on the street, and think,

‘Oh, look at her! How does her husband let her walk out like this?’ We’re Muslim and it’s

against our religion.”’

Although most women appeared to submit to surveillance, several developed their own

strategies to quietly subvert it in order to have a ‘normal’ life. Yasmin suggested that the

system was breaking down because younger girls were more willing to risk the

44

consequences of transgression: ‘Nowadays we’ve got the right to say if we want to talk to

guys, do whatever they (girls) want. No one can say anything to them. And it feels like

they’re improving, Yemeni people are changing! I think the kids born and brought up here,

now they see everything in front of them!’

External factors

External factors influencing identities included both the media and British law. Almost all

interviewees described the media as responsible for creating a negative stereotype of

Muslim identity which incited hostility towards Muslims and made them feel less at home in

Britain. September 11th was cited as a major catalyst for this change in their lives and many

women expressed anger and frustration at the way in the media represented Muslims as ‘all

the same’ and holding extremist positions.

British law also played an indirect but important role in shaping individual identities. It

created both responsibilities and rights for married women, requiring them to work and at

the same time offering protection against domestic violence and forced marriage. In

situations where British women marry Yemeni men, immigration policy requires that the

British partner should have a job. Although initially viewed as a burden – something

imposed upon them by parents in order to find a husband for them – most interviewees

described how working had given them a sense of independence and self worth. Thus

participation in the labour market, a consequence of marriage, becomes a way in which new

identities are forged as independent and financially self supporting. This works against what

might be seen as the controlling role of in-group marriage to produce greater conformity,

regulate freedoms and sustain prevailing cultural attitudes.

45

Marriage as an example of hybridity and change between generations

Marriage was an issue which all interviewees spoke about. Eight of the ten women in this

study had been married according to the traditional system where husbands are selected

and approved of by parents. Seven were married to men from Yemen and only one woman

had married a British Yemeni man. Five described their marriages as arranged, whilst three

described circumstances in which they were forced or blackmailed into marriage. One

woman had resisted parental efforts to ‘marry her off’. The remaining single woman

mentioned marriage as a threat issued by an older relative, as a way to control her

resistance to cultural norms of behaviour.

Interviewees often spoke of marriage as a religious duty, a role they were expected to

assume and therefore had little choice in, but also something they wanted to do voluntarily.

All Muslims in the group accepted the arranged marriage system as a legitimate way of

finding a husband, even if they did not agree with some of the ways it was implemented,

and most spoke of dating and boyfriends as haram - forbidden. However the non-Muslim

completely rejected such lack of freedom and expressed frustration at not being able to

choose a partner for herself. She talked about going out with boyfriends as a ‘red line’ that

could not be crossed without risking her personal safety and as something that severely

constrained her behaviour. She was the only person who rejected marriage as a way to live

her life.

In spite of the apparent acceptance of the arranged system, participants had firm and

shared expectations of what marriage should be about and how partners should behave.

These include a perception that marriage should happen at a later age, once formal

46

education is completed (and for some that included university), that individuals should have

the right to refuse a suitor, unlike their village-based counterparts in Yemen, and that the

relationship with their husbands should be based on equality and companionship, with

shared responsibilities. Mariam expressed a desire for a partner whom she could

communicate with on an equal basis rather than someone to have ‘an existence in parallel

with’. This was in strong contrast to the expectations of her parents. She and several others

described how they had negotiated with husbands to retain freedoms or assert rights,

expecting compromise from men as well as from themselves. In situations where this was

not possible, they sought divorce. In this way they challenged expectations of others –

parents and the Yemeni community in Sheffield as well as those of husbands and relatives in

Yemen - to conform to customary practices of marriage, in which patriarchal authority

prevails and women play a subservient role. In doing so they invoked British values of

equality but also their Islamic rights to be treated fairly within marriage, combining them to

strengthen their position.

Whilst most interviewees did not complain about their own husbands, they were often

critical of marriages to Yemeni men, saying this practice caused great unhappiness.

Differences in culture were usually cited as the source of problems, with Yemeni men

disapproving of their working wives and expecting to exert authority over them, even when

husbands did not work. Zeinab summed this up: ‘For a girl to get married to a guy in Yemen,

it’s really hard...it’s not just the fact that you have to work to get them in, you have to put a

house in your name. And then when they’re in the country, they start complaining! They

say, “Why are you working?” I’ve seen it happen to so many people and 90% of the girls are

really unhappy. And I don’t want to be like them.’ She remained adamant that she would

47

not marry a ‘typical’ Yemeni man. For Mariam her dual role as breadwinner and housewife

created a deep sense of resentment towards her husband, and led to conflict between

them. This ultimately led to divorce. For others such as Huda, differences were resolved

through negotiation but several women expressed the view that marrying a man from

Yemen was extremely difficult and not something they accepted willingly. These examples

illustrated how interviewees did not conform to stereotypes of Muslim women as meek and

submissive. Thus, within this group, new ways of thinking and behaving in relation to

marriage were articulated which retain some elements of Yemeni tradition but combine

them with both Western values and Islamic rights. My key informant also said that fewer

women were now marrying men from Yemen and that this represented a change in

attitudes more generally, with ‘parents learning from earlier mistakes’.

Interviewees also set their own criteria for husbands, with religion prioritised; husbands did

not have to be Yemeni but must be Muslim. There is circumstantial evidence that such

intergroup marriages are happening in Sheffield, with a small number of Yemeni women

marrying men from other Muslim backgrounds. Parental acceptance of this suggests that

ethnic dilution is now regarded as less important than religious continuity by some families.

Changes between generations

Like marriage, many other issues illustrated changes in attitudes between generations.

Participants appeared to be more consciously Yemeni and Muslim than their parents,

making efforts to retain language skills and learn more about their religion3. At the same

time they regarded themselves as more British, being able to speak English competently and

engage with the mainstream society in ways their parents could not; Fatima and Suha still

3 Seven interviewees regularly attend classes to study the Koran.48

performed roles as translators for their mothers during doctor’s appointments or hospital

visits. Attitudes to education were also very different, with interviewees describing

themselves as more educated and aspirational than their parents, conscious of the benefits

of education and prioritising this for their children as a major goal in their lives.

49

Chapter Five: Discussion

From these findings a pattern of multiple and overlapping identities emerged, with ethnicity

and religious identifications strongly shaped by gender and context as well as individual and

collective actions. Several issues require further reflection in the light of theoretical

material.

Thick and thin identities

As noted in Chapter 2, Cornell and Hartmann (2007: 76) theorise changes over time in

ethnic identity construction, distinguishing between ‘thick’ and ‘thin’ identities. They

describe how ethnic identities tend to change from thicker to thinner over time, with groups

progressing more from ‘being’ to ‘feeling’. However they illustrate situations in which

ethnic identity has instead become more important over time, particularly when groups are

subject to discrimination or other external factors which position them unfavourably.

Assertion processes also affect the importance attached to ethnic identities, with some

groups taking actions which revitalise their ethnicity. Thus it is the combination of external

and internal factors in particular circumstances that determine how thick or thin identities

are in each group. At the same time they recognise that diversity within groups is possible,

with individuals choosing how strongly they manifest their ethnic identity.

Applying this model to my case study, Yemeni identity within this group can be seen as

thick. Ethnicity plays a significant role in organising the lives of interviewees, influencing

who they marry, socialise and work with and how they see themselves in relation to other

50

groups. The persistence of their Yemeni ethnicity may be due to several factors. Staub

(1989) suggests that ethnic identity is renewed by continued migration, with new arrivals

strengthening cultural and religious aspects of identity. For some women in this study, the

experience of marrying a man from Yemen brought changes in their lives which served to

reinforce their sense of being Yemenis – having to think about bringing up children as

Yemeni was one aspect of this. Thus the impact of this particular type of in-group marriage

has been to reinvigorate their ethnic identity and make it more strongly asserted. However

this is not true for all interviewees; for one woman the experience of a forced marriage has

resulted in her distancing herself from traditional cultural practices and positioning herself

closer to the boundaries of her ethnicity.

Religion is also involved and closely woven into ethnic identity, with Islam often ranked as

equal to claims of Yemeni-ness. Many of the women in this study have taken steps to

renew and strengthen their religious identity as Muslims, making efforts to learn more

about their faith and practice it in a more conscious way than their parents. This may also

have reinvigorated their asserted identity as Yemenis. At the same time global events of

‘Islamic’ terrorism have impacted strongly on individual identifications, with interviewees

describing how they have been categorised as different from mainstream British society.

This has produced a sense of exclusion among some and may also have contributed to a

stronger sense of being Yemeni.

These factors contribute to an overall picture of a thick ethnic identity, strongly reinforced

by religious identification as Muslims. Together ethnicity and religion remain dominant in

participants’ lives, with Yemeni identity very much a matter of ‘being’ (experienced) rather

than ‘feeling’ (a more emotional and distant attachment). Boundaries remain clearly

51

defined, especially around marriage and behaviour, and are enforced in traditional ways

while visible markers of conformity - dress – are still maintained. However, it is clear from

interviews that change has taken place between generations with the young women in this

group simultaneously claiming a strong British identity and exerting their own influence on

many characteristics of their original ethnicity. Some of these changes are subtle and not

easily perceived (such as expectations of marriage) but have played an important role in the

remaking of Yemeni identity for this group. Thus individuals perceive themselves as more

confident than their parents’ generation and capable of negotiating between their multiple

identities. Their religious identity as Muslims has, however, dominated identification

processes by outsiders in the wider society and made it more difficult for them to assert

their British identity. Thus British identity might be considered as ‘thinner’ – more strongly

felt than lived (although definitely not absent from daily life) and subservient to a Yemeni

one.

The generational model of identity

Attempts to understand variations in individual identities in relation to generational change

have been difficult. This case study indicates that the conventional model of ethnic

assimilation, based on change taking place gradually over different generations, does not

entirely apply. Although individuals defined themselves as more British in certain ways than

their parents4, there were no obvious differences in attitudes and values between second

and third generation interviewees. Overall they appeared similar in the ways they

4 Although different from their children, several older Yemeni men interviewed in 2007 also described themselves as Yemeni and British. All retired ex-steel workers, they had chosen to live in Britain rather than retire back in Yemen. They indicate that dual identity is not something exclusive to second and third generation Yemenis but may depend on how long they have lived in Britain and their own experiences of living here.

52

expressed their identities, with third generation Yemeni identities just as ‘thick’ as those of

second generations. A possible reason for this lies in the definition of ‘generation’ in

relation to migration. Conventional use of the term suggests a pattern of regularity and

predictability, with cohorts of first generation migrants arriving together at the same time

and settling permanently in the host country rather than migration happening over

prolonged periods and with migrants moving between both countries in unpredictable

ways. There is also the expectation that second and third generations will be born in the

host country and therefore determine their identities based on the experience of living in

Britain alongside second-hand accounts of the ‘home’ country. However the evidence from

this case study suggests a different, less ordered process.

Yemeni men first started to come to Sheffield in the 1950’s and first generation migrants

continued to arrive during the 1960’s and 70’s. Their persistence in the belief of the ‘myth of

return’ (Searle, 2007) meant that families remained in Yemen – there was little incentive to

move them from there - and the men continued to travel back and forth between Yemen

and Britain for many years. Thus many second and even third generation children were

born in Yemen and spent much of their childhood there before coming to Britain. Eight of

the ten women interviewed were born in Yemen and movingly described ‘first generation’

experiences of disorientation and adaptation to their new lives in Britain. It is therefore

difficult to categorise them as conventionally second generation; their lived experiences of

village and family routines in Yemen during their childhood will have had some effect on

how they perceive their own identity.

Piore (1979, cited in Cornell and Hartmann, 2007) attempts to define generation not in

terms of where individuals were born but instead by where they grow up: if they spent most

53

of their childhood and adolescence in their country of origin, then they are more likely to

behave as first generation migrants whereas those who migrate as children are ‘more likely

to adopt the culture of their destination,’. Whilst this idea ‘fits’ with second generation

interviewees in this study (who might be defined as the ‘1.5 generation’, according to Portes

and Rumbaud, 2001, cited in Cornell and Hartmann, 2007), it does not apply to third

generation women whose grandfathers and fathers worked in Sheffield but who were born

in Yemen and spent their childhood there. Their descriptions of coming to Sheffield match

those of second generation interviewees and they should probably be treated as the same;

in other words the ‘thickness’ of their ethnicity had not declined.

Another factor affecting ethnic identity in this case study, and confusing any attempt to

understand findings in relation to generational change, is that of individual lived experience.

Although she left Yemen at the same age (12) as several other women in this study, Yasmin

identifies herself as strongly British whilst they describe themselves as more Yemeni. Her

life story and the rejection of her Yemeni identity suggests that personal experiences play a

much stronger role in her identity, particularly relationships with family members, than her

place of birth or the age at which she arrived in Britain.

Unanticipated consequences

Examination of contextual factors contributing to Yemeni identity suggest that the situation

in which women have to work in order to bring husbands from Yemen into Britain has had

consequences contrary to those intended by the Yemeni community. The combination of

British law and within-group marriage practices described earlier result in women being

required to get jobs and earn a salary. Whilst several interviewees described how they were

54

not keen to work initially, they now enjoy the freedom and sense of independence it brings,

and have continued to work after having children. This is against the original intentions of

parents who, by marrying their daughters to Yemeni men, wished to preserve existing

cultural practices and gendered norms of behaviour. Such a situation fits the model of

unanticipated consequences described by Merton (1957) where one action can produce

different effects than those intended. The experience of going to work has also has

contributed to raising the aspirations of most women in this group, with several aiming to

go to university as mature students. One participant also pointed to the way in which

working women acted as role models for younger siblings and how families began to realise

the economic benefits of having salaried daughters. As an unmarried woman, she found

that working gave her greater freedoms and enabled her to circumvent surveillance.

Therefore it can be argued that circumstances, in this case British law and the requirement

to work that it imposes upon women, have changed individual identities. Many women now

regard working as a strategic way of gaining greater control over their lives and more

freedom to move outside their homes. This is very different from their mothers’ gendered

identities as housewives, occupying a private sphere and dependent on husbands to provide

for them. Islamic concepts of equality for women are also involved in this situation, with

women using religious arguments to justify working to husbands and family members. This

is another example of hybridity in which both British and Yemeni institutions, customs and

values are combined to empower women.

55

Similarity and difference within the group

Despite limitations of relying on one person to find interviewees, I was able to gain access to

a small group of individuals who shared some basic similarities (ethnicity, gender, age,

religion and place of work) but who also displayed considerable diversity in their behaviour,

attitudes and values.

A key feature of this group was the fact that all women interviewed were working for the

same organisation. Although I was aware that their status as employed made them

distinctive from many other Yemeni women in Sheffield, the importance of this ‘sameness’

became more apparent as interviews progressed. It is likely to have had a considerable

effect on findings, with participants’ identities strongly influenced by their experiences of

working and gaining independence, shaping aspirations for themselves and their children. It

is also possible that, working together in an organisation where women employees are now

more numerous than men, their individual and collective identifications as women who are

‘breaking with tradition’ will have been reinforced. They can therefore be seen as

individuals who are actively engaged in remaking their identities, operating at the extremes

of cultural boundaries (but not religious ones) to redefine themselves as Yemeni and British

in very distinctive ways. However they are unlikely to be typical of most other Yemeni

women in Sheffield.

In spite of their similar backgrounds, there were clear differences within the group in

attitudes to many different aspects of their ethnic and religious identities. A pattern

emerged of opposites, with three loose groupings apparent. Those with a firm sense of

Yemeni identity all felt strong ties to Yemen, regarded their faith as important and had

56

accepted arranged marriages. They adopted Muslim dress codes and appeared to co-

operate with the system of surveillance imposed upon them. Their general manner during

interviews suggested they were contented and did not feel constrained by the expectations

of others, with several stating that they could happily live in Yemen as well as Britain. In

contrast the most rebellious individual refused a Muslim identity, did not want to get

married, resisted surveillance and dressed as she wished. Family ties were an impediment

to her freedom and she aspired to move away from the collective and live a life of her own

choosing. Unlike the others, her ethnic identity was a serious constraint to her

independence and she wanted to abandon it in order to claim a different identity. The third

group consisted of those who were located between these extremes. They shared religious

convictions but in spite of this did not feel strongly Yemeni and held less conformist views

on marriage, although conceding to the arranged system.

Such patterns of diversity reflect the complexity of the circumstances in which ethnic

identities are produced and the individuality of responses from participants. They also

challenge popular conceptions of ethnic minorities as ‘all the same’ and Muslim women as

meek and submissive. Explanations of these patterns are likely to be complicated, with

individual positions on any one aspect of ethnic identity affected by a huge variety of

factors. These include personality, experiences of migration and life in Britain, relationships

within families and friendships with others, collective identity processes as well as

contextual factors involved in the making of identities. Acting together in different ways,

they constantly shape and redefine individual identities over time and space, thus making

each unique but also similar.

57

The case study

Part of the value of this research lies in its particularity as an intrinsic case study (Stake,

2000). By focusing on a distinctive group of individuals, I have been able to explore some of

the fine grained and situational detail of ethnic identities within the group. However,

although participants are atypical and do not broadly represent Yemeni women in Sheffield,

it has been possible to elucidate some of the factors influencing identity construction

processes more generally and to observe how they interact. It has also been possible to

discern patterns in the ways in which individuals articulate their identities and the forces

shaping these. At the same time within-group diversity aided understanding of situations

and processes, with the less conforming member of the group providing insight into ‘what

goes on behind the scenes’ and balance to some of the stories of others. This was

particularly true for issues around the voluntary adoption of Islamic dress codes. At the

same time, many other participants were critical of the surveillance practices they were

subjected to and echoed her opinions on this phenomenon.

This case study also offered an opportunity to test constructivist theories of ethnic identity.

Using the general model proposed by Cornell and Hartmann (2007) and then applying some

of their ideas on how identity changes over time, it has been possible to deal with the

complex interaction of different factors affecting identities. Interpreting these, it is possible

to determine the direction of change in certain aspects of Yemeni-British identities.

Findings from this study suggest that some women have resisted and resented the arranged

marriage system. Information from other sources (Abtisam Mohammed; personal

communication), suggests that marriage to men from Yemen is declining as a practice within

the Yemeni community in Sheffield. My key informant also told me that women are getting

58

married when they are older (in their 20’s rather than their teens) and that some young

women feel able to marry Muslim men from other ethnic backgrounds. She said this was

not the case ten years ago, suggesting that change has happened recently and that parents

have learnt from earlier ‘mistakes’( resulting in a high divorce rate). This is perhaps a

positive sign of change in a direction that gives women more autonomy and control over

their lives.

59

Chapter Six: Conclusions

Findings from this study present a picture of individual identities which are complex and

multiple, constructed through negotiation and competition between ethnic, religious and

gendered identities. These are influenced both by circumstantial and structural factors

operating in the society in which participants live, and also by individual and collective

actions. Processes of assertion and categorisation, reformulation, redefinition and rejection

are all observable in the ways in which different identities are articulated by interviewees.

Interviewees claimed both Yemeni and British identities, recognising that the salience of

these was contextual. Whilst Yemeni-ness was seen in more essentialist terms as a fixed

attribute, defined by origins and kin, Britishness was more fluid and defined in terms of

values, aspirations and behaviour. They did not regard these categories as binary opposites

but expressed them simultaneously; they could be both at the same time. However they

acknowledged that the way others perceived them had an influence on their own assertions

of Britishness and Yemeni-ness. Using Cornell and Hartmann ‘s model of ‘thick’ and ‘thin’

ethnic identity, Yemeni identity within the group could be described as ‘thicker’ and was a

crucial organising force in participants’ lives. By comparison British identity is ‘thinner’ and

manifested in less visible ways but also plays an important role, although affected more by

‘outsider’ categorisations.

Religious identifications generally could not be separated from ethnic ones. Being a Muslim

and being Yemeni were woven closely into individual self-perceptions and were equally

60

important for most, although for some religion was prioritised. Religious identity also

appeared to reinforce ethnic identity. Contrary to Nagel and Staeheli‘s findings (2007), Arab

identities were not prioritised above religious identities within this group and there was

little consensus on how important they were. However findings do support their argument

for the need to treat Muslim identities as complex and diverse rather than having a single

essentialised form. Whilst Yemeni and Muslim identities were compatible, there were

suggestions that British identity was sometimes in conflict with Islamic identities,

particularly in situations where identity was ascribed. Thus adopting Muslim dress codes

generated a feeling of ‘otherness’ among interviewees, produced by the hostile reactions of

the majority, non-Muslim population. In this respect, religion has strong similarities with

race in the way it is used by others to enforce exclusion and marginalisation in everyday life

through practices of stereotyping and discrimination.

Gender was another important issue in identity construction, but was also closely linked to

religious and ethnic identifications focusing on cultural practices. Most interviewees

voluntarily defined themselves as Muslim women. Such definitions gave them clearly

delineated symbolic roles as keepers of family honour and reputation, as noted by Dwyer

(2000). However acceptance was not universal with one individual engaged in a process of

creating a different identity by breaking free from an ascribed religious identity. Although

unique in this study, her example emphasised the need to recognise diversity and to avoid

making assumptions that individuals all conform to the same religious identity.

Social institutions of marriage and surveillance were two main arenas in which ethnic

identities were contested, with evidence of tension and resistance by most participants in

the study. Situations were described in which boundaries were redefined and identities

61

reformulated. These moved beyond traditional concepts of Yemeni or British identities,

producing new interpretations; married women expected to be able to work and study

whilst still performing traditional roles as wives and mothers. This operates against parental

strategies to reinforce gender ideals (Dwyer, 2000) through arranged marriages to men

from Yemen.

Structural factors were also important in identity construction processes. British law acted

as a major contextual force, empowering women and enabling them to assert rights in

relation to marriage and domestic violence whilst also imposing responsibilities – having to

work. The sense of independence articulated by interviewees was an unanticipated

consequence of their entry into the labour market. This independence was contrary to

traditional expectations of the roles that women should adopt within the family. It

contributed to the redefinition of their identities; the women interviewed felt they could

work, contribute financially to their families and still claim their ethnic identity as Yemeni

and Muslim, albeit of a new hybrid kind.

Findings indicate that identity constructions have changed over time. Although

acknowledging the historical context of their ethnicity, participants position themselves

differently to their parents. In their accounts of working and studying, and the aspirations

they expressed for themselves and for children, they demonstrate ways in which they have

acted to take greater control of their lives and become more visible, engaged members of

British society. This has been achieved in spite of serious Islamophobia and racism affecting

their everyday lives. Although producing a sense of exclusion from some aspects of British

life, it has not prevented most individuals from confidently asserting their identity as British.

62

Within-group diversity is a significant feature of this study. Opinions on almost every

attribute of Yemeni identity ranged between strongly polarised extremes. This supports

Eriksen’s assertion (1993) that within a single ethnic group, individuals may use and

prioritise their ethnic identities differently, with some choosing to emphasise it as primary

and others regarding it as less important. Therefore findings strengthen the pleas made by

others (e.g. Kahani-Hopkins and Hopkins, 2002, Philips, 2006) that individuals from one

ethnic group must not be treated as ‘all the same’ and instead heterogeneity should be

recognised.

Finally, in support of Dwyer (2000), I suggest that this study demonstrates British Yemeni

identities as ‘hybrid’. Fabricating them from the raw material of primary identities and also

from lived experiences, individuals have crafted their own identities in which the original

elements are combined but also transformed. Although assertion is an important part of

this process, ascription by others also plays a role, specifically in connection with exclusion.

Thus not being seen to be truly Yemeni by relatives in Yemen, or as properly British because

they wear headscarves in Sheffield defines what they cannot be and contributes to the

formulation of new hybridised identities. Construction processes also draw upon religious

identities and combine these with other ones; the women in this study all asserted their

right to work and study, using both British law and Koranic authority to justify their position.

This illustrates how they have actively changed and reformulated their identities to produce

different understandings of self and the world around them. Echoing the statement of

Eriksen (1993: 138), being the daughter or granddaughter of a Yemeni immigrant in Britain

is completely different from being Yemeni in Yemen. Instead the women in this study hold

63

uniquely British-Yemeni-Muslim identities, shaped by gender, class and their surroundings in

Sheffield.

Validity

In a qualitative study of this kind, validity can be considered in terms of the methodology

used and the trustworthiness of findings (Mason, 2002: 187). In this particular case, semi-

structured interviewing proved to be a good method of exploring detail and diversity within

the group, enabling me to examine different aspects of identity and their complex

interrelationships. The interview situation was also appropriate to this study as it focused

on how individuals represented themselves to the researcher, using self definition as a way

of accessing some of the dimensions of ethnic and religious identification.

In my face-to-face encounters with participants, there were clear indications that I

established a relationship of trust. Their accounts were credible and coherent, thoughtful

and often personal. They were also consistent with each other and yet at the same time

variable, giving me no obvious reasons to doubt the sincerity of what I was told. In addition I

was able to use material from other interviews (Wilson, 2007) to corroborate with findings.

As a researcher I acknowledge that my position as ‘sympathetic’ might be considered as

biased. However, as an outsider to the organisation my interviewees were employed by, I

was able to maintain distance in my research. This is reflected in my findings and analysis of

difficult and emotional issues such as forced marriage. I also made efforts to exclude my

own views from interviews and to treat information provided by participants with respect.

Questions were carefully phrased and aimed not to indicate any sort of judgement on the

64

material I was told. The fact that several women related events in their lives that they did

not want included in this study suggests that I was successful in doing so.

Although findings from this research offer my interpretation of how participants chose to

represent themselves to me, this does not invalidate the authenticity of these

representations. My aim has been not to reveal an ‘objective, knowable social reality’

(Mason, 2002: 190) but to explore the meanings attached to and interpretations of various

identities. It is also a study of identities in-the-making rather than identities as complete

and therefore specific to a particular context and time. However these results may have

relevance for other situations. Whilst the group studied are not representative of Yemeni

women in Sheffield or British Muslims in general, findings provide a clear illustration of the

complexity and interrelated nature of ethnic and religious identities. They indicate the

importance of structural issues in identity construction, with work defined as an important

factor empowering women in this situation. Further research could explore the salience of

this and other structural issues among young women from other ethnic backgrounds to

determine their impact on identity.

Relevance to Policy

This study reinforces the message from other research that ethnic identities are complex

and should not be stereotyped. Findings contribute to the idea put forward in the Parekh

report (2000: 23) that British national identity is much more diverse than it is ‘normally

imagined to be’. This needs recognition in current debates on identity; the women in this

study offered yet another understanding of what it means to be British, alongside those of

many other groups. Policy makers should take note of this and allow for greater diversity in

65

the ways they define groups. Yemenis do not fit into categories of ‘Black British’ or ‘British

Asian’, and ‘British Muslim’ is generally used to refer to Pakistanis or Bangladeshis. This

means they are often made invisible in discussions of the particularities of ethnic identity.

Findings also illuminate the importance of British law to the women’s identities in this study.

They used it to empower themselves, gain rights and demand equal treatment from others.

Laws against forced marriage gave one individual the courage to resist the imposition of

traditional marriage customs upon her. Future changes in the law should therefore

recognise this and ensure they protect the rights of ethnic minority women to comfortably

define themselves as Yemeni, Muslim and British.

66

ReferencesAlibhai-Brown, Y. (2001) Who do we think we are? Imagining the New Britain, London, Penguin.

Anwar, M. (1998) Between Cultures: Continuity and Change in the Lives of Young Asians, London, Routledge.

Archer, L. (2001) ‘‘Muslim Brothers, Black Lads, Traditional Asians’: British Muslim Young Men’s Constructions of Race, Religion and Masculinity’, Feminism and Psychology, Vol 11 (1) pp 79-105.

Assinani, G. (2002) Being a Sheffielder and being a Yemeni: Two Worlds or One? Conference Report from a Yemeni Youth Conference prepared for the Yemeni Youth Association, Sheffield.

Bakalian, A. (1993) Armenian Americans: From Being to Feeling Armenian. New Jersey, Transaction. Cited in Cornell, S. & Hartmann, D. (2007) Ethnicity and Race: Making identities in a Changing World, Thousand Oaks, Pine Forge Press.

Barth, F. (1969) Introduction in Barth, F. (ed.) Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Organisation of Culture Difference, Oslo, Universitetsforlaget.

Baumann, G. (1999) The Multicultural Riddle: Rethinking National, Ethnic and Religious identities, London, Routledge.

Brubaker, R. (2002) ‘Ethnicity without Groups’, Archives Europeenes de Sociologie, Vol 43 (2) pp163-189.

Brubaker, R. and Cooper, F. (2000) ‘Beyond Identity’ Theory and Society, Vol 29 (1), pp. 1 -47.

Burdsey, D. (2006) ‘‘If I Ever Play Football, Dad, Can I Play for England or India?’: British Asians, Sport and Diasporic National Identities. Sociology, Vol 40 (1) pp 11- 28.

Butler, J. (1990) Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York, Routledge. Cited in Jenkins, R. (2008a) Social Identity, Third edition. London, Routledge.

Cohen, A. (ed) (1982) Belonging: Identity and Social Organisation in British Rural Cultures, Manchester, Manchester University Press.

Cornell, S. & Hartmann, D. (2007) Ethnicity and Race: Making identities in a Changing World, Second edition. Thousand Oaks, Pine Forge Press.

Dein, A. and Burman, M. (2004) Born in Yemen, Forged in Sheffield [Radio programme] BBC Radio 4, transmitted 26th April 2004, 11.00 – 11.30am.

67

Devine F. & Heath, S. (1999) Sociological Research Methods in Context. Basingstoke, Palgrave.

Douglas, M. (1966) Purity and Danger. London, Routledge. Cited in Eriksen, T. H. (2002) Ethnicity and nationalism: Anthropological Perspectives. Second edition, London, Pluto Press.

Dwyer, C. (1999a) ‘Veiled Meanings: Young British Muslim Women and the Negotiation of Differences’. Gender, Place and Culture, Vol 6 (1) pp5 26

Dwyer, C. (1999b) ‘Contradictions of Community: Questions of Identity for Young British Muslim Women’. Environment and Planning A, Vol 31, pp 53 - 68

Dwyer, C. (2000) ‘Negotiating Diasporic Identities: Young British South Asian Muslim Women’, Womens’s Studies International Forum, Vol 23 (4) pp 475 – 486.

Dwyer. C. (2006) ‘Introduction: Mapping the Issues’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, Vol 29 (3) pp397 - 410.

Eriksen, T. H. (2002) Ethnicity and nationalism: Anthropological Perspectives. Second edition, London, Pluto Press.

France, A. (2007) Understanding Youth in Late Modernity, Maidenhead, Open University Press.

Gans, H. (1979) ‘Symbolic Ethnicity: The Future of Ethnic Groups and Cultures in America’ in Gans, H. et al (eds) On the making of Americans: Essays in Honour of David Riesman, Philaldelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press. Cited in Staub, S. (1989) Yemenis in New York City: The Folklore of Ethnicity. Philadelphia, Balch Institute Press.

Gilroy, P. (1997) Diaspora and the detours of identity, in Woodward, K. (Ed) (1997) Identity and Difference, London, Open University Press, pp. 301 -341.

Hall, S. (1996) ‘Introduction: Who Needs Identity?’ In S. Hall and P. Du Gay (eds.) Questions of Cultural Identity, London, Sage.

Halliday, F. (1992) Arabs in exile : Yemeni migrants in urban Britain, London, I.B.Tauris.

Hareven, T.K. (1978) Transitions: the family and the life course in historical perspective, London, Academic Press.

Hussain, Y. & Bagguley, P. (2005) ‘Citizenship, Ethnicity and Identity: British Pakistanis after the 2001 Riots’, Sociology, Vol 39 (3) pp 407-425

Issacs, H. R. (1975) Idols of the Tribe: Group Identity and Political Change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Cited in Cornell, S. & Hartmann, D. (2007) Ethnicity and Race: Making identities in a Changing World, Thousand Oaks, Pine Forge Press.

68

Jacobson, J. (1997) ‘Religion and Ethnicity: Dual and Alternative Sources of Identity among Young British Pakistanis,’ Ethnic and Racial Studies Vol 20 (2) pp 238 – 256.

Jenkins, R. (2008a) Social Identity, Third edition. London, Routledge.

Jenkins, R. (2008b) Rethinking Ethnicity: Arguments and Explorations, Second edition. London, Sage Publications.

Joseph, J. (2004) Language and Identity: National, Ethnic and Religious, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.

Kahani-Hopkins, V. and Hopkins, N. (2002) ‘Representing British Muslims: the strategic dimension to identity construction’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, Vol.25 (2), pp 288-309.

Mason, D. (2000) Race and Ethnicity in Modern Britain. Second edition, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Mason, J. (2002) Qualitative Researching. Second edition. London, Sage Publications Ltd.

McDowell, L. (2005) Hard Labour: The Forgotten Voices of Latvian Migrant Volunteer Workers. London, UCL Press.

Merton, R. K. (1957) Social Theory and Social Structure. Second edition, USA, The Free Press.

Mohammed, A. and Makmahi, Y. (2001) The Veiled Voice: Insight into the Social and Inspirational Needs of Yemeni Women, Sheffield, Yemeni Community Association & The Burngreave Yemeni Women’s Group.

Moya, P. M. L. (2000) ‘Reclaiming Identity’, Introduction in Moya, P. M. L. & Hames-Garcia, M. R.(eds), Reclaiming Identity: Realist Theory and the Predicament of Postmodernism, California, University of California Press.

Nagel, C. and Staeheli L.A. ‘British-Arab perspectives on religion, politics, and ‘the public’’, in Hopkins, P. and Gale, R. (2008) Muslims in Britain, Race, Place and Identities available from: http://www.arab-communities.org/downloads/religious (accessed 11/01/08).

Parekh, B. et al.(2000) The Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain: Report of he Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain. London, Profile Books.

Park, R. E. (1926/1950) ‘Our Racial Frontier on the Pacific’. Pp 3 -45 in Race and Culture, Glencoe, IL: Free Press. Cited in Cornell, S. & Hartmann, D. (2007) Ethnicity and Race: Making identities in a Changing World, Thousand Oaks, Pine Forge Press.

Philips, D. (2006) ‘Parallel Lives? Challenging Discourses of British Muslim Self Segregation’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, Vol 24, pp 25 -40.

69

Piore, M. J. (1979) Birds of Passage: Migrant Labour and Industrial Societies. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Cited in Cornell, S. & Hartmann, D. (2007) Ethnicity and Race: Making identities in a Changing World, Thousand Oaks, Pine Forge Press.

Portes, A. And Rumbaut, R. (2001) Legacies: the Story of the Immigrant Second Generation. Berkley, University of California Press. Cited in Cornell, S. & Hartmann, D. (2007) Ethnicity and Race: Making identities in a Changing World, Thousand Oaks, Pine Forge Press.

Saeed, A., Blain, N. and Forbes, D. (1999) ‘New Ethnic and National Questions in Scotland: Post-British Identities among Glasgow Pakistani Teenagers. Ethnic and Racial Studies, Vol 22 (5) pp 821-844.

Searle, K. (2007) From Farms to Foundries: Racism, Class and Resistance in the Life-Stories of Yemeni Former Steel Workers in Sheffield, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Sheffield.

Searle, C. and Shaif, A.(1991) ‘‘Drinking from one pot’: Yemeni Unity, at Home and Overseas’. Race and Class 32 (4) pp65-81.

Sen, A. (1993) ‘Positional Objectivity.’ Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol 22 (2) pp126 -145.

Sheffield City Council, Department of Employment and Economic Development (1988) Yemeni Community Profile, Sheffield, Sheffield City Council, available from: www.sheffield.gov.uk/equality-and-diversity/race/community-profiling (accessed 10/01/07).

Stake, R. (2000) ‘Case Studies’, in Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S.(eds) ‘Handbook of Qualitative Research’. London, Sage.

Staub, S. (1989) Yemenis in New York City: The Folklore of Ethnicity. Philadelphia, Balch Institute Press.

Taylor, I. et al. (1996) A tale of two cities: global change, local feeling and everyday life in the North of England: a study in Manchester and Sheffield, London, Routledge.

Wilson, N. (2007) Unpublished interviews with British Yemenis in Sheffield, produced for the exhibition ‘Coal, Frankincense and Myrrh: Yemen and British Yemenis’, Museums Sheffield.

Woodward, K. (Ed) (1997) Identity and Difference, London, Open University Press.

70

Appendix 1: Semi Structured Interview GuideBackground Information and life historyWhen and where born/ age?When arrived in UK/Sheffield?Family – father and mother’ backgrounds/siblings/other family members who are important in their lives?Education – where/when/how long for/multiethnic/good or bad?Current status – single/married/divorced/children?Employment – what/where/how?Ties to their country of origin – what sorts/how strong/ how important?

Expressing individualityAs an individual, how do you see yourself? Has this changed over time?(prompts of family status, age, gender, class, work, nationality, religion, career ambitions, interests and hobbies, politics)

Explore some of these in more detail, eg. Family life – roles, tasks, commitments, aspirations, Working life - choice of jobs – why, how, chosen or imposed?Social life – friends and activities, spare time – where, when, whoEducation – goals, desires: motivations and reasonsPersonal aspirations – future plans and goals?

How do you think other people see you? - from within the Yemeni community?- from outside the Yemeni community?

How can you tell this? What clues do you have?

Group Identities - Belonging to an ethnic groupWhich groups, informal or formal, do you feel a part of, or a sense of belonging to?(prompts of gender, family, age cohort at school, colleagues at work, social groups, community, national, religious and other supra national, eg Arab, diaspora)

Explore categories in more detail – in what situations and geographical places/with whom/ when/why?Which are the most important for you? (and why?)What sorts of things indicate that you belong to these groups? (language, dress, behaviour, attitudes, official stuff – passport etc?) Are any of them especially important to you?

How do these categories impact on your life? E.g. being a woman, being a Muslim woman, being a Yemeni woman (in comparison with being a man/ a Muslim man/ a Yemeni man)?Living in Sheffield rather than Yemen?

Explore each one in terms of choice and compulsion – something you chose to belong to, something forced upon you by others (who, why, how, in what circumstances)? What freedoms and constraints?

71

How do you feel about that? Personal preferences – things you would like to have choice over, things you are happy with?

How does this differ from your parents’ generation and experiences? What things have changed and what have stayed the same?

More on ethnic category: Being YemeniDo you think/see/feel yourself to be Yemeni? What makes you Yemeni? How does this differ from other Muslim groups in Sheffield? How do you express this? Is it ‘being’ or ‘feeling’?What are the things that your parents have taught or passed on to you to help you continue to feel Yemeni?Role in relation to your parents and other older first generation Yemeni migrants? Role as ‘custodians of culture’ passing it on to their children…or something else?Anything you consider might be important to pass on to your own children? How do you think their situation might differ from yours?

How outsiders see youWhat labels have been applied to you? How did you feel about them?Stereotypical view of ethnic minorities as ‘all the same’ – what do you think of that? Do you feel that you are allowed to be different? What sorts of constraints are imposed upon you by others?

Negotiating between individual and group identitiesAre there any situations in which you have to negotiate between different positions, i.e. being yourself and being part of a group? Describe them; when, where, how, why? Are they problematic?

The past and the futureAnything you would wish to change about your past? What, why, how?Where do you think you will be in 20 years? Where would you like to be and why? If you have children, how do you think things might be different for them?

9/11 and other events What has it been like in the last few years? What impact have ‘bigger things’ had on your life: anything in particular? How do you feel about them? Has it affected your sense of who you are?

Anything more to add?

72