It was very interesting to read all the comments, and to see converging criticism from four different people! They are saying that these studies do not add much to advancing theory on culture of honour and its link to sexism, and that it shouldn't be published in JPSP as it is. So this automatically made me think if my PhD work would contribute to the advancement of theory, and what I should do in order to publish in good journals (not just JPSP).
I liked this comment.
By creating an index, the authors treat honor at the cultural level as a continuous variable. Nations all value honor to a greater or less degree. This seems different from the way anthropologists have talked about cultures of honor. There are societies in which the social and economic world, and familial and gendered relations are structured around the honor code, and there are other cultures that have supplanted the honor code with liberalism. So, does it make sense to talk about cultures that are, say, moderate on the honor index? I think it's worth at least discussing the theoretical implications of considering honor as a construct that can vary in strength, as opposed to an organizing code that is present or absent in a culture.
I'm glad some reviewers think this way :)
In my first study, I started with looking at how people who endorse honour strongly would judge people who appear to be gender non-confirming (masculine women and feminine men) more harshly (an outcome of honour showing how honour may punish gender nonconfirming people), and then I can look at this from the other way around, so I can break people's honour, and see if they try to regain their honour through behaving in more gender-confirming ways (this would provide evidence for how honour works in making men keep their masculine images, and women their feminine images).
Next, I may go beyond gender norms and look at other social norms (e.g., high-status people appearing/behaving like low-status people. e.g., once one of my father's patients told my dad: "Doktor bey o elindeki eski telefonla napiyorsun? Doktor adamin antenli nokya telefonu mu olurmus, bir iphone alsana" demis. Hastalarim yuzunden telefonu upgrade etmem gerekti demisti babam. Baska bir reklam ajansi sahibi arkadasim Izmir'de parka bisikletle cikilamiyor biliyorsun Toronto'daki gibi rahat bir ortam yok demisti, cunku musterilerini onu o sekilde sort ve bisikletle gorurlerse ona is vermezlermis.). These high-status people appearing like low-status would probably be judged as less honourable, less competent people in an honour culture like Turkey than in non-honour culture. So honour would work as an organizing code which enforces people to confirm to the image and appearance norms expected of them.
Then, I may take it further and look at moral rules and conventions.
Research on moral psychology and philosophy differentiates moral rules (you shouldn't hit your friend) from conventions (you shouldn't make noise after 11pm), and they say that these are two forms of social regulation. In Turkey for instance, if people break moral rules, they are strongly condemned, others shame the violator of the moral rule. When it comes to conventional rules, which are broken all the time, and rule of law doesn't work properly to punish the violators, right, and because of the lack of laws as social regulators, people are encouraged to break the conventional rules. However, others may still shame the violators of conventional rules too, and they do. Maybe to a different extent.
In western Europe for instance, violations of even certain moral norms are punished by law.
This also fits to the evidence which suggests that honour cultures have evolved in places where there are weak law-enforcement (conventions are like rule of law). In these cultures, moral rules might have.
And perhaps it is more meaningful to study the role of honour codes as a social regulator from a violations perspective, because it is easier to measure the effects of honour (emotional outcomes: shame, anger, etc.).
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder