Migration Processes in Central and Eastern Europe - Multiple Choices

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
Migration through Gender, Age and Class Perspectives
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
There is a long-standing feminist debate on the
various roles adhered to women in nationalist discourses.
According to Nira Yuval Davis and Floya Anthias (1989, 7)
women are implicated in nationalism:
1. as biological reproducers of members
of ethnic collectivities;
2. as reproducers of the boundaries of ethnic and
national groups;
3. as participating centrally in the ideological
reproduction of the collectivity and as
transmitters of its culture;
4. as signifiers of ethnic or national differences, as
a focus and symbol in ideological discourses […];
5. as participants in national, economic, political
and military struggles.
This construction of women in nationalist
discourse produces a differentiation between women who
belong to the national majority and women who belong
to ethnic minorities or are migrants. Migrant women are
positioned outside of the national community and are
considered unable to reproduce or symbolise the nation.
In recent years I have come across newspaper
reports on so-called “fake” marriages between Cypriot men
and Eastern European women. In accordance with EU
legislation a marriage is considered “fake” when its main
target is to obtain a long-term residence permit and finally
citizenship rights for one of the spouses. There seems to be
a widespread consensus in Greek-Cypriot society that such
“fake” marriages have to be forcefully prosecuted. It is,
however, conspicuous that almost exclusively certain female
Eastern European spouses are suspected of “fake” marriages
(Cyprus Mail, October 20, 2000). While the motives for
getting married are actually a contested issue in contemporary
Greek-Cypriot society there seem to be no doubts about the
motives that differentiate a “fake” marriage from a “real”
one when it comes to marriages of foreign sex workers.
The cultural anthropologist Stefan Beck (2001: 44) has
shown that the concept of romantic love that is increasingly
prevalent among Cypriots in their twenties and thirties is
considered by the generation of their parents as a threatening
or at least irritating import of Western irrationality. Until the
'70s, Cypriot marriages used to be arranged by the parents
to a large extent, sometimes without knowledge or consent
of the couple. Economic wealth of the families involved,
career options of the groom as well as reproductive health
of the bride were decisive criteria for selecting suitable
spouses for one's children – not love. When it comes to
marriages between Eastern European “artistes” and Cypriot
citizens, however, rational considerations like the acquisition
of citizenship by marriage are regarded as despicable and
romantic love is demanded as proof of the authenticity of
the marriage.
The prominent role that the argument of love
plays in the prosecution of “fake” marriages seems to be
closely connected to a national way of thinking that considers
the family as core of the nation – a relationship between
unequal members which is based on love, not on contract.
According to Annie McClintock (1997, 91), the family trope
is important for nationalism because it offers a “natural”
model for a social hierarchy within a putative organic community
of interests. This model is unsettled by migrant
women marrying into the community.
One divorce lawyer who makes a significant part
of his living from divorces of so-called “fake” marriages
holds a pretty nationalist view. Concerning Eastern European
“artistes” who marry Cypriot men, he said, “All they want
is to stay in the country. Okay, but why do they do this by
hurting me as a country and destroying a family that I
already have and it works for me?” The equation of family
and nation, both threatened by Eastern European sex workers,
is even more apparent when the lawyer explains why he has
no problem with divorces in general, “I don't mind that the
Cypriots fall in love with a Cypriot girl, a young Cypriot girl,
as long as they are both Cypriots and they are going to have
a child who is going to grow up and be a useful citizen.”
This distinction between an Eastern European
“artiste” and a young Cypriot woman is explainable when we
take into account the nationalist meaning of the family as
the site of reproduction of the nation. In this logic only
Cypriot women are able to give birth to “useful citizens”.
But what is a “useful citizen”? According to the lawyer, a
“useful citizen” is someone who is ready to hold the fort in
times of war or more specifically in the event of a Turkish
attack. He says, “We want the society to be strong because
we cannot take up arms and fight Turkey. What are our
weapons? Our economy and our families. […] A Russian girl
who is married to a Cypriot guy, in case of conflict she is
going to leave.”
This perception and representation of migrant sex
workers seems to be connected on the one hand with the
sexualised and body-related services they offer, and on the
other hand with their precarious work and residence status
which subjects them to various forms of dependency. Their
status of dependence allows employers and authorities to
exploit the women or tolerate their exploitation while at the
same time presenting themselves as protectors. Both on the
part of the employers and on the part of the authorities the
argument of “protection” is used in order to legitimise
large-scale measures of control. On the one hand it is
argued that the “artistes” need protection because they are
35
Migration Processes in Central and Eastern Europe: Unpacking the Diversity