Introduction

In August 2017, the Burmese military launched the “clearance operation” on the Rohingya people.[1] The Council on Foreign Relations estimated that over the course of the first month of the attack, at least 6,700 Rohingya were killed.[2] By the beginning of 2018, the estimated number of killings rose to 25,000.[3] In March 2018, Andrew Gilmour, the UN Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights commented on this inhumane disaster in which he officially deemed the issue a matter of ethnic cleansing and genocide.[4] Notably, the genocide forced more than 800,000 Rohingya to flee to Bangladesh, creating the world’s largest refugee camp.[5]

​

Both during and after the genocide, the Rohingya women, including teenagers, suffered from rape, torture, and violence: first from the Burmese military, then from the Rohingya men who were emasculated during the genocide. This paper focuses on this double-victimization of the Rohingya women and argues that women’s bodies have been used as the battlefields for men: sexual violence against women is considered not only the best way for the enemy to humiliate the men of the population, but also the most efficient way for emasculated men to reclaim their masculinity during the post-conflict periods. 

​

During the Genocide: Women’s Virginity, Men’s Honor

In the event of wartime, conflicts and genocide, rape should not be understood as merely a way for men to satisfy their sexual desires. Men rape women not to rape women, but to emasculate the men of the population. In Our Bodies, Their Battlefields, Christina Lamb provides a detailed account explaining how women’s bodies are exploited as an extension of men’s battlefields.[6] Women are strategically raped to morally and spiritually attack and shame the men, forcing the men to leave their lands due to the humiliation of failing to protect their women.[7]

​

In an interview with the women survivors of the genocide, Afroza Anwary, a social scientist, found that women’s virginity is particularly emphasized by the Rohingya community: “In the Rohingya community the virginity of women is extremely important. The thought that my 12-year daughter could be raped drove me crazy.”[8] The interviewee then left the village in the fear that the Burmese soldiers would rape her daughter. She described her decision as the following: “My family had a paddy field and a beautiful home that we did not want to abandon. But our lives and our honor are a lot more important than our property.”[9] In this context, “honor” refers to the virginity of the teenage girl of the family.  For the Rohingyas, preventing the girl’s virginity from being taken by the enemy is viewed as an effort to defend the honor of their family and of their community. 

​

Since the offenders of rapes are still dismissing the crimes they committed and have yet to be held accountable, there is admittedly no direct evidence showing that the Burmese military specifically targeted teenage girls with the aim of ruining their virginity and thereby destroying what the Rohingya people perceived as their honor. However, many of Anwary’s interviewees did recall that the Burmese military seemed to particularly search for “adolescent girls who were virgin,”[10] providing indirect evidence of the presence of the conduct and the substantial fear it instilled.

​

Furthermore, the rapes and sexual violence that the Burmese soldiers directed towards the Rohingya women shared one common feature: most of them were conducted in the presence of the Rohingya men. The underage girls were sexually abused in front of their parents; one female survivor recalled that the soldiers first tied her husband to a tree, and then raped her in front of her husband, whom they kept alive until they finished raping her.[11] Combining these two pieces of evidence, it is then reasonable to argue that, for the Burmese soldiers, raping the women was not the ultimate goal. The act of raping was not enough for the Burmese soldiers without destroying the well-emphasized virtue of virginity of teenage girls by practicing sexual violence in front of the Rohingya men. Both instances demonstrate how the Burmese soldiers intended to humiliate the men of the population by raping women. 

​

In addition, during the course of the genocide, the Rohingya women were not just victimized by soldier’s sexual assaults, they were also victimized by the Rohingya community’s gendered cultural norms. The term “the gendered cultural norms,” refers to the large emphasis that the Rohingya community places on women’s virginity. The consequences are two-fold. On the one hand, as aforementioned, associating women’s virginity with the honor of the community renders women the primary targets of rape because rape causes the dishonor, humiliation and emasculation of Rohingya men. If virginity were not so highly emphasized, it is likely that the teenage girls would not be so particularly targeted. Furthermore, the entire logic behind the soldiers’ motivations to rape and the Rohingya men’s feelings of being humiliated is based on the gendered belief that women’s bodies or virginity in particular are an extension of men’s property. Women’s subordination to men is a logic adopted by the Myanmar soldiers, the Rohingya men, and the Rohingya women. 

​

On the other hand, the cultural emphasis on women’s virginity also significantly reduces women’s resilience to rape and sexual violence. The women victimized by rape and sexual violence are very likely to commit suicide because they believe that they destroyed the honor of the family. In several examples, women would commit suicide due to shame even when they were not raped but instead forced to take off their clothes in front of other villagers.[12] In this case, the violent crimes committed by the Myanmar soldiers were not the only murderers of the women; the cultural gendered norms were also responsible for their deaths. 

​

The Post-Genocide Refugee Camps: Women’s Pain, Men’s Masculinity

Because masculinity is often perceived as deeply rooted in the use of force, violence, victory, and the successful defense of “their” women’s virginity, failing to defend women often leaves men feeling emasculated.[13] After the genocide, the Rohingya men who ended up in the refugee camps were radically emasculated. Therefore, using violence against, and tightening control over, women became ways for men to reclaim their masculinity. The refugee camps may have helped the Rohingya women to escape from the torture of the Myanmar soldiers, but they they fell victims to the Rohingya men. 

​

At the refugee camps, the Rohingya women are undertaking multiple efforts to survive from the trauma of the genocide and to cultivate their agency. Women actively participate in NGO projects, providing support to each other and assuming positions in the education centers.[14] However, the Rohingya men see the women’s agency-seeking efforts as a threat to their already undermined masculinity. Women who work with the NGOs have reported being beaten up by the men, who accused the women of violating the Islamic doctrine that prohibits them from contacting strangers.[15] The situation became worse with the involvement of ARSA, the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army: 

​

“We were really concerned about security and safety as they became more active in the camps...They threaten women who want to seek divorce and who are active in supporting women’s rights. In 2019 and 2020, I taught the Burmese curriculum to women aged between 10 and 40 who wanted to learn the Myanmar language. It is very important for us to understand, to read, speak and write for our repatriation and to integrate with the Rakhine and Burmese community. ARSA supporters threatened and threw stones while I was teaching. Later I had to shut down the class because women and girls who came to my evening classes were no longer safe.”[16]

​

The above example shows that, in the refugee campus, the post-conflict situation ironically created opportunities for women to seek agency. Their attempts to do so indirectly challenged the traditional, patriarchal gender roles, which itself became a threat to the men who were emasculated by the conflicts. In response to this threat and in line with their desire to reclaim masculinity, they tightened control over women’s freedom and self-autonomy through the use of violence, dismantling women’s efforts to make a change. Women therefore underwent the second layer of victimization that is indirectly a result of the genocide and directly enforced by the Rohingya men.

​

The prevalence of domestic violence among the Rohingya refugee community follows this logic. In 2021, the International Rescue Committee (IRC) revealed that the Rohingya women’s domestic partners perpetrated 94% of gender-based violence they experienced in the refugee camps.[17] In addition, the physical abuse that they experienced is often highly justified by community norms and considered a normal practice by both men and women.[18] The extremely high rate of domestic violence and justifiable physical abuse in the Rohingya community should be understood in light of the construction of masculinity. In fact, the link between domestic violence and masculinity is not a new discovery in feminist studies. Men’s masculinity is often associated with domination, force, and conquest.[19] For the already emasculated Rohingya men who found their previous masculine identities being stripped as a result of the genocide and the failure to defend their homeland or the virginity of their women, women’s attempts to challenge the traditional gender roles are rendered a further threat to their masculinity. 

​

The practice of domestic violence is often self-reinforcing because it also consolidates a belief in women’s inferiority within the patriarchal structure.[20]  Therefore, the prevalence of domestic violence in the Rohingya community in the refugee camps not only reveals the extreme gender inequalities that dominate the community’s values, but also reinforces these inequalities.

​

In addition to domestic violence, Rohingya teenage girls are particularly vulnerable to child marriage. The practice of child marriage has deep historical and cultural roots in the Rohingya community, but it remained relatively regulated before the genocide, as the Myanmar state law regulates and prevents child marriage. This is different in the refugee camps because the regulatory laws are no longer in place and teenage girls and their families often find child marriage the only way to support themselves, since resources are relatively limited.[21] Reports have also shown that the rate of domestic violence among these teenage girls is significantly higher than the rest of the population, exposing the already vulnerable girls to another layer of victimization.[22]

​

The practice of child marriage is often justified by the religious doctrines upheld by the Rohingya community, as reflected in the statement made by a Rohingya man in the refugee camp: 

​

“Our religion says that when a boy grows up and understands the meaning of a wife [with regards to religion], he should get married. If the girl grows up, she should get married. This is told in Islam. We couldn’t abide by those beliefs back there [in Myanmar]...if the girl grows up, she should get married, this is told in Islam.”[23] 

​

The value of teenage girls is constrained to marriage and measured with respect to their physical body only. Their potential to develop agency and pursue a life outside of marriage is purposefully undermined, demonstrating a consolidation of the traditional gender roles, in which men would be able to assert control over women. The religious practice of the community again helps to justify the gendered practices, perpetuating gender inequalities and reinforcing the patriarchal structure within the Rohingya community. 

​

Beyond the violence that the Rohingya women experienced within their community, they, particularly the girls, are further prone to being victimized by sex traffickers. Neither surviving from the Myanmar soldiers nor escaping from the oppressive gendered dynamics in the refugee camps could promise them a bright future. Hasina, a teenage Rohingya girl, tried to escape the endless pains of her life.  She contacted a “friend” who promised to find her a way out of Myanmar but instead trafficked her to a brothel in Bangladesh. She described the experience as the following: 

​

“I saw five men at the same time today. They are raping me the same way the Myanmar soldier raped me. They pin my hands to the bed, force my legs open and thrust so hard it hurts.”[24]

 

The statement provided by the owner of the brothel reveals that Hasina’s experience is not unique: 

​

“When the Rohingya girls arrive in Bangladesh, they don’t know anything. They are so innocent, scared, and unaware. I tell these little girls, look you have nobody, I’ll marry you, but we need money to get married. Rohingya girls are easy to convince. I have sex with all my girls, I take their virginity. Then I share them with the clients.”[25]

 

The quotes highlighted the vulnerability and fragility of the Rohingya teenage girls, who were initially the subjects of targeted rapes and then became the primary targets of child marriage, sex trafficking, and sexual abuses. The gendered victimization and exploitation of their bodies never seem to end. 

​

Conclusion

The Rohingya genocide and its aftermath have revealed the deeply entrenched gendered dimensions of violence, where women’s bodies serve as the extension of men’s battlefields over power, honor, and masculinity. This paper highlights the double victimization experienced by the Rohingya women, both during and after the genocide. During the genocide, the Burmese military weaponized sexual violence not just to attack women, but as a means to humiliate Rohingya men.  After the genocide, Rohingya women faced the second level of victimization at the refugee camps imposed by Rohingya men who had been emasculated during the conflict. To reclaim their masculinity, Rohingya men tightened their control over women’s freedom, dismantled their attempts to cultivate agency and challenge the traditional gender roles, and used domestic violence as a tool to assert their control over women. Under this context, religious norms are frequently deemed as the foundational support of men’s exploitation of women. 

​

Ultimately, this paper underscores the cyclical nature of gender-based violence in conflict and post-conflict societies, demonstrating that the oppression of Rohingya women is not incidental but structurally embedded within both war tactics and patriarchal traditions. Addressing these injustices requires not only humanitarian intervention but also a fundamental reexamination of gender dynamics within displaced communities, ensuring that women’s survival does not come at the cost of their autonomy and dignity.

​

​

​