‘Culture’ is perhaps one of the most contested notions within social, academic, human rights and even legal contexts. Yet ‘culture’ has become increasingly important within public policy frameworks, impacting everything from health practice to criminal justice policies.

Work which seeks to understand and address violence against women and girls is no exception; ‘culture’ is increasingly a part of how we think about what happens, to whom and why. Yet much of what we hear about the role and impact of ‘culture’ (whether in conversations, the media or formal settings) problematises whole communities: the discussions build up the idea of whole groups of people as a ‘problem’ requiring a ‘solution’. This may even risk further marginalising the very women and girls who need our support.

This chapter briefly challenges some of the ‘common-sense’ ideas around ‘culture’ and the links between ‘culture’ and violence against women and girls. It seeks to encourage health practitioners to adopt a more careful and nuanced approach to how they consider ‘culture’ in their work with women and girls.

In the UK, the term ‘culture’ is often used in relation to peoples and communities who are considered to be ‘other’; that is, somehow different from that which is assumed to be the ‘norm’ and therefore authentically ‘British’. In addition, there is often a conflation between ideas of ‘race’, ‘ethnicity’, ‘community’ and (increasingly) ‘religion’. This inevitably results in the ‘essentialising’ of whole communities: the reduction of groups to simplistic, single elements. In practice, this means that men from some social groups are, for example, considered to be more (‘naturally’) patriarchal and violent. Also, whole groups of women are viewed as more subservient and therefore more vulnerable. This can be easily demonstrated by a quick scan of much media reporting on forced marriage or ‘honour-based’ violence. Stories often focus on the ‘cultural’ issues rather than the widespread nature of all forms of violence against women and girls in all sectors of society. The effect is an echoing of historic, colonial perspectives that (re)presented some communities as less evolved. At the same time, individuals from black and minority ethnic (BME) communities may also use ‘culture’ in a problematic way; for example, it may be a platform to promote ideas of an ideologically boundaried ‘community’ within which there is consensus around a range of norms and values.

The term ‘culture’ is also used in the context of other ‘groups’; for example, ‘youth culture’, ‘gay culture’, ‘queer culture’ and ‘gang culture’. In each instance, the idea of ‘culture’ suggests something fixed, established and clearly definable. Yet individuals from those ‘groups’ are likely to have a range of connections to, and understandings and interpretations of, that very same ‘culture’.

Given the difficulties that arise around the notion of ‘culture’, on the surface it might seem useful for practitioners to disregard ‘culture’ altogether. Yet doing so would be equally problematic: ‘culture’ is a significant factor in how we all live our lives (see Box 2.1). Therefore, it is a critical factor in work around violence against women and girls. What is important is that the perspectives we have described are challenged; otherwise, they might inhibit compassionate individual relationships in health care settings. For example, in order to begin to engage effectively with ‘culture’ in this context we must avoid the conflation of ‘culture’ and ‘race’ in our thinking and assumptions, as these render some people as having less or more of any set of behaviours, attitudes and so on. We must rethink present notions that cultural identity is static, singular and one-dimensional. In reality, individuals often negotiate a range of different, interlocking and overlapping ‘cultural’ spaces with varying degrees of ease and tension, including family spaces, school and work settings, peer groups, youth or activity ‘cultures’ and so on. We must come to terms with the idea that ‘culture’ is dynamic and complex. While we can seek to understand perceived dominant norms and values, it is much more important to understand an individual’s interpretation of, and relationship to, what is often described as ‘culture’. People are individuals and assumptions may inhibit good health care.