Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Enough Psuedo-Feminist War-Mongering in the Name of Islamic Women

Posted by Joshua Holland, AlterNet at 12:35 PM on July 9, 2009.


Really.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get World in your
mailbox!

 

Sometimes hypocrisy is hard to discern, other times not so much.

When it comes to neoconservative claims that we have to occupy far-flung lands in order to defend Islamic women from their sons, brothers and husbands, it's nothing short of striking. After all, any mention of the "plight" of women in Christendom is dismissed by the very same conservative bobble-heads as the incoherent rantings of hairy-legged "feminazis."

I'm on a bunch of political press lists, including several from the Right. Today, I got this:

On Wednesday, French lawmakers met to discuss whether or not to legalize a nationwide ban of the burka, the head-to-toe dressing that Muslim women are expected, if not demanded, to wear. Academics present at the hearing called the tradition archaic and cult-like behavior. France, as it happens, has the largest Muslim minority out of every other European country.

Mano Bakh, an ex-Muslim banned from Iran for speaking out against Islamic radicalism, feels that US lawmakers should follow suit with evoking similar regulations.

Mano Bakh, it appears, is trying to join the prosperous ranks of "former Muslims" who tell right-wing activists that their virulent Islamophobia isn't racist at all, but is entirely justified. It's a great gig if you can land it.

“The Muslim religion belonged to a barbaric society that lived 1,400 years ago,” says Bakh. "Many of its facets are not applicable for today’s advanced world. The wearing of the burka is just one example.”

Of course, fake Western feminists (and I'm not talking about actual feminists -- you know, people who take issues that affect women seriously) don't give a damn about what the Islamic feminists they claim to care for actually want.

Case in point: the Burqa. I've met a large number of real, live feminists from majority-Islamic countries, and each and every one has said that dress is an obsession of Westerners, and that what they care about, fight for, and sometimes risk their safety over is reforming marriage and divorce laws, education, political participation, etc. What's more, they report that within their own, home-grown movements, women are themselves deeply divided over veiling. And, finally, because the dress issue is of interest to foreigners, it allows traditionalists to paint their indigenous fights as a product of Western meddling, endangering their persons and marginalizing their fights. Thanks for nothing.

That's not to say that indigenous women's rights activists don't benefit from international solidarity from their sisters and brothers abroad -- the point is that the expansion of rights is a domestic struggle that's worthy of support rather than something foreigners can realistically impose from without.

Let me leave you on an interesting note. In the midst of this whole French burqa brouhaha, IPS News sent a correspondent into the streets of Paris -- in neighborhoods with large Muslim populations. Guess what she found?

Well, not a lot of burqas ...

There was not a burqa in sight. On the bustling streets around Boulevard de Belleville, in one of the most diverse neighbourhoods here, women wore a variety of clothing, including summer dresses, jeans, chadors, headscarves and traditional African dress, but no burqas.

A trader laughed when asked if he had any burqas - the Islamic garment that covers the whole body leaving just slits for the eyes.

"Yes, I have some in stock but I've never sold one," he told IPS. "I swear I have yet to sell a burqa in four years. So where is the burqa that they want to ban? "

PS: this isn't just a feature of the right -- it spans the whole ideological spectrum. And while I imagine that their motives are purer, I'm pleased that Sonali Kolhatkar and Mariam Rawi took on Feminist Majority for its ridiculous support for escalating the conflict in Afghanistan. Here's a no-brainer: no 20-something American GI fighting for his or her life against an active insurgency has ever done a single thing to make life better for any woman in any combat zone anywhere in the world. It's just not what they do.

Digg!

Tagged as: islam, right-wing, burqa

Joshua Holland is an editor and senior writer at AlterNet.


House of Representatives Passes Health-Care Reform Bill in Historic Vote
With the vote of a single Republican, Democrats passed the Affordable Health Care Act for America.
Post by Adele Stan. November 7, 2009.
Anti-Woman Amendment to Health Care Passes House
The Stupak amendment -- an anti-choice measure that could virtually eliminate insurance coverage for abortion -- will be attached to the health-care reform bill.
Post by Adele Stan. November 7, 2009.
House Will Take Up-or-Down Vote on Stupak Amendment, Threatening Women's Rights
The House leadership bows to anti-choice congressmen, allowing them a vote on an anti-choice amendment to the health-care bill.
Post by RH Reality Check. November 7, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
"real" feminists?
Posted by: Q30 on Jul 9, 2009 3:23 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"people who take issues that affect women seriously"

Does that include people who think stupid-ass hamburger commercials are important enough to get indignant about?

I would imagine that most Islamic women-- not to mention most women in general-- would consider that linked item to be a laughable waste of breath.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: "real" feminists? Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: "real" feminists? Posted by: Q30
» blessing in disguise Posted by: LazyEight
» RE: "real" feminists? Posted by: Sister_Lauren
Barbaric societies of the past
Posted by: deejayvee on Jul 9, 2009 5:46 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
“The Muslim religion belonged to a barbaric society that lived 1,400 years ago,” says Bakh. "Many of its facets are not applicable for today’s advanced world. The wearing of the burka is just one example.”

He does have a point. Of course, it applies to every single major religion in the world.

But what is also interesting is that religious movements that have developed in modern times, within civilised societies, also contain many facets that are not applicable to the real world we find ourselves in today.

I think I see a pattern here...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Women should be allowed to wear a burqa if they wish
Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com on Jul 9, 2009 9:03 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The issue is whether someone or a group of someones are forcing adult women to wear clothing they do not wish to.

Banning the burqa is another example of the left believing the ends justify the means, willing to violate individual liberty in order to protect women as a whole.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Joshua: Any reason at all will be used to continue imperial ambitions, like 911
Posted by: pfgetty on Jul 10, 2009 2:50 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are very gullible and naive, Joshua. It is obvious that the issue of women's rights is just one reason for occupying Afghanistan.
It seems you just caught on to this.

But the bigger reason given for why we are in Afghanistan, the War on Terror, based on the attacks of 911, you are still very naive about. You really believe that we are in this poor, mixed up country on the other side of the world because there might be terrorists hidden in caves that are going to attack us again, as on 911.
You are very gullible. A good reporter should be able to sift out bs a lot better than you.
911 could not have been carried out by a band of terrorists. They beat the best air defense system in the world, it is said. Impossible! Four jets hitting their targets in one day, when all of the intelligence from around the world was warning us of the attack? A "pilot" who could not adequately fly a Cessna gets into a commercial jet and while keeping the passengers as hostages flies a pattern that most pilots say would be impossible or nearly so for even experienced commercial pilots? I don't think so. Three buildings collapsed at free fall speed, with nanothermite found in the dust, and we are told that the heat from the fires did it? Crazy.

But you believe all of that. Why are you surprised that we believe that we are in a war in Afghanistan to help the women there? That's an easy one. That I really could believe, as there is really no proof that it is not true.

But there IS proof that 911 was not carried out by 19 hijackers, that it was an inside job. And yet you believe it. How nuts.

Joshua, if you want to be considered as a great journalist, you have some work to do. Don't be so lazy. Learn about the truth of 911. The rest will become very clear after that.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» why do you waste your time? Posted by: Joshua Holland
When in Rome...
Posted by: Christian Southern Liberal on Jul 10, 2009 4:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Should western countries, who have opened their doors to people who are escaping from third world countries, have the right to maintain their culture?

I mean, isn't it OK to say "We welcome you to our country, but we want you to become (name the nationality) if you choose to live here."

Btw, if women from tribes that do not wear tops, were relocated to western countries, then I am positive that the new "society" is going to make them cover up their breasts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: When in Rome... Posted by: hilaryuk
in islamic societies...
Posted by: ellie on Jul 10, 2009 5:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
at home, within your own national borders, it's expected that you dress and behave according to norms and traditions...

when outside your home country, it's expected that you tone your dress and behavior to come close to the other country...

it's common on flights from countries that require women to be fully covered to have a mad dash to the bathroom before landing to change into clothing that closely matches the landing country...

if you want to wear a burqa go for it, but like the trader said, in 4 years he hasn't sold one...

think the word burqa is being used instead of hajib which is a simple headscarf... what about bad hair days or when it's cold outside and you put on a scarf or hat???

let's clean up this misunderstanding folks before we institutionalize a language screw up into law...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

FYI
Posted by: Christian Southern Liberal on Jul 10, 2009 7:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Been searching the net looking trying to find out how Afghan women are being treated today. It is much better than under Taliban rule (public executions are way down).

Some stats:

"Ultimately, despite seven years free from Taliban rule and promising improvements, the statistics remain disheartening; 57% of Afghan brides are younger than 16, 87% of women are illiterate, only 5% attend secondary school and a third are routinely subjected to violence."

Why are we here all over again?

Btw, Ellie (previous poster) is right in that "burqa" can describe all sorts of clothes, it can be a covering for both men and women against sand storms in the desert up to the head to toe covering for women in Afghanistan and northern Pakistan. Also, the Afghan burqa has not been an age old tradition, it was around in the middle ages...noble women wore them around the 1900's. It became law to wear one in 1996 by the Taliban gov't.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: FYI Posted by: hilaryuk
you are beginning to get on my nerves
Posted by: Dr. Watson on Jul 13, 2009 12:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and not in a good way. Mr holland are you a tool of the government or what. I don't mean the Obama or the Bush government don't get me wrong. . . I mean D.C. the District of Corruption I seriously used to like your articles but lately you have become very watered down, and frankly impotent in my book. I guess you must have majored in "Journalisim" or even in "Selling Out" in college but your articles have really become a left leaning Sean Hannity shown (what does that mean? . . . Maybe both). I don't want to call you a Michael Savage Wiener, but I would, and you wouldn't have much retort. Your glaring ommissions are to many to name in this short space. . . But I hope you know just as much as I so that they are there and completely left out (you being the "journalist" and all. It seems to be a trend for you). This is not a gossip blog meant to enflame world opinion against Islam. I think Alternet is supposed to offer us the news. Can you distinguish between your own personal onpinion and the international consensus. .. or at least try to understand cultural relativism like the rest of us? Seriously, I have skipped the past few of your articles because you are starting to sound more and more like a message board than like an information source . . .For what it is worth. I am looking forward to your self rightous, and disingenous reply . . .tool.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]