Britain: Foreign Husbands and Virginity Tests
During the 1950's and 1960's the British Government had an active policy of recruiting labour from its ex-colonies (especially the West Indies and India and Pakistan) to run its many services like the public transport system and the national health service. Since the various "economic crises" of the 1970's, however, there has been growing concern about the number of immigrants still going into Britain. Action has been taken by both Labour and Conservative Governments in trying to stem migration, with particular impact on women. Among measures introduced which affect women are the "virginity tests" being carried out on Indian and Pakistani women entering Britain, by immigration officials, and a renewed piece of legislation which bans foreign husbands and fiances of British women from living in Britain.
Virginity Tests
The virginity tests given by immigration officials first came to light in 1978. They were given to Asian women coming to Britain supposedly to verify (a) whether they were too
old to come as dependents, and (b) whether they were indeed coming as fiancees (custom in their home country frequently being that they should be virgins before getting
married). "But the frequency with which women were thus brutalised depended not on the category of entrant they fell into but on whether Immigration Officers wanted to
use these methods, and on the attitude of the Minister responsible", writes Amrit Wilson in her striking presentation of Asian women in Britain, Finding a Voice.
Whatever reasons are given, this kind of sexual examination is clearly outrageous in any circumstances. Women in both Britain and India organised against this harassment. An article in Spare Rib No. 81 (April 1979) reports:
"The Asian Women's group AWAZ (which means "voice" in Hindi) organised a demonstration at Heathrow airport on February 10 (1979), calling for a public inquiry into
the workings of the immigration service: 'But there'd be no point in another Select Committee behind closed doors. What is needed is something completely open to the public, so that people can understand the meaning of these outrages.' It is not just a question of winning concessions - getting virginity tests or X—ray tests banned — though these would be important steps. The demonstation also demanded that the ministers and immigration officers responsible be made accountable for their actions, and asked whether the (Labour) government condoned the present police state situation where people have to show their passports to get medical treatment, to claim welfare benefits, even to send their children to school.
"A pamphlet produced by the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants with evidence for the Royal Commission on Criminal Procedure details the way the police are
used in immigration cases. They can arrest people on suspicion of being illegal immigrants, then lock them up demanding they prove they are here legally. This of course
contributes to racial tension and gives police a free hand."
The virginity tests have supposedly now been stopped both in Britain and on the Indian sub-continent, but not without similar women's demonstrations in India. The same
issue of Spare Rib carries a report from Subhadra Butalia in New Delhi:
"A wave of indignation swept the country as the Indian press flashed the news of vaginal examination of a woman seeking immigration to the UK. Leading newspapers condemned the practice as obnoxious and 'yet another shocking evidence of the racial discrimination practised in the UK against coloured people'.
"Women's organisations in Delhi, Madras, Bombay, Pune and other parts of the country held emergency meetings and assailed the British immigration policy which commits assault on the female body. They demanded immediate withdrawal of this hateful practice and an apology from the British government....
"Pressure mounted in the form of demonstrations outside the British High Commission buildings. Till you apologise, we will fight,' shouted women of Madras Pennurimai lyakkam (Movement for Women's Rights) and they pasted their slogan 'Racists apologise' over the official name plate before leaving the place.
"In Bombay, Calcutta and Pune leading women's organisations and university women held protest demonstrations and demanded an unconditional apology from the British
government. In Delhi, more than 300 teachers and students of Delhi University and Jawahar Lai University stormed the British High Commission building. They flourished placards which said, 'Castrate Heathrow Rapists', 'We'll fight you on our land', 'Down with British Racism'. They compelled High Commission officials to come out and receive their memoranda, which condemned the increasing wave of racism in Britain and demanded better conditions of work and living for their country-people settled there."
Foreign Husbands
The original proposal, bringing back a law introduced by the Labour Government in 1969 and repealed by them in 1974, was to prohibit foreign husbands and fiances of British women living in Britain. The notion behind this was clearly to restrict numbers of Asian men married to British women of Asian origin coming to Britain, the grounds
being that "arranged marriages" and "marriages of convenience" are used for the sole purpose of getting Asian men entry into Britain. The proposal is not intended to
restrict British women with other commonwealth husbands (Australian, Canadian).
Secretary misled the House of Commons when he said (14 November 1979) that British women born in this country would have a Right under the new Rules. They will in
fact be at the mercy of immigration officers' discretion and will have no legal rights to be joined by a foreign fiance or husband.
arranged marriages. The White Paper refers to the 'exploitation of marriage as a means of primary migration'. By 'primary immigration', the Government means that foreign
husbands are 'primary immigrants' in the sense that they will be able, in turn, to bring their own dependents to join them in Britain. Mr. Raison, Home Office Minister of State, referred in a speech to Conservative Party Conference in 1979 to 'the pattern of immigration that sees in each immigrant who comes here a steppingstone over which other members of his family or village may then pass.'This is a disgraceful allegation coming from a Minister responsible for administering a system of immigration controls which prevents dependent family members from joining their relatives in this country".