Commenter Natasha drew my attention to the Obama campaign creating a position (that hasn’t yet been filled) for a Muslim liaison [link]. On the face of it, there isn’t anything wrong with such a move. American Muslims are a constituency and Obama is running for president and presumably wants Muslim votes and outreach to American Muslims.
However, the person who was originally rumored to have been hired for the position, said some unsavory things: “We need to recognise that the social structure in the Muslim world is very different from America’s. American women need to understand that what is best for them is not necessarily what is best for Muslim women. Advocacy of women’s rights in the Muslim world must show sensitivity to local political realities.”
Whether or not the Obama campaign hires Haim Nawas (quoted above) for this position, her views deserve to be countered.
There are several things wrong with what she’s saying:
There is an implication in her words that American women (or America) are in a position to do anything about Muslim women. In other words, there is an implication of imperialism – cultural or war-based. That is an insult to both American feminists (who tend to be anti-war) and to Muslims the world over, because it’s not doing Muslims any favors to have a “sensitive” policy crafted for Muslim women when Muslim lands are attacked, especially if “sensitive” means letting Muslim men do with ‘their’ women what they may. Nor is it the intent of American feminists to emancipate Muslim women through cultural imperialism. That white women have done this is a myth created by anti-feminists.
The “social structure” in the Muslim world that Nawas is painting as “so different” from that of the United States is not a good basis for determining the best policy. Social structures that oppress women need not be respected simply because they are the social structures – challenging oppressive social structures is what feminism is all about. To baldly state that what is best for American women — human rights — is not what Muslim women want is to simultaneously dehumanize and patronize Muslim women.
Those strange brown women. After all, why would they want to:
1. Be free from domestic violence
2. Have the right to work and keep their money
3. Limit and control the number of children they have
4. Have access to divorce
5. Be protected from child marriage
6. Have legal recourse in case of rape/assault
7. Have freedom of movement
8. Have access to safe and legal abortion and birth control of their choice
9. Be safe from sexual harassment at work
10. Have the right to wear what they want
Etc., etc., etc.
Those brown women! It’s their social structure, doncha know. It makes them prone to self-destructive behaviors, such as forsaking their rights and their status as humans. American women? They’re carping bitches who don’t know their place. Doesn’t mean all the women of the world are going to follow suit. They’re sensible. They haven’t started imagining they’re human beings. Let’s not put ideas in their little Muslim hijab-covered heads.
Which brings us to the third point: “Advocacy of women’s rights in the Muslim world.”
Right, that.
The thing is, we haven’t done any. A lot of American feminists have lost what few principles they had about the absoluteness of women’s humanity and they aren’t quite able to figure out what’s wrong with patriarchal religions, the veil, the sex industry, violent/misogynist porn, dilution of feminism, SAHM-ism, etc. And American feminists have lost what little political power they had as well, resulting in things like the global gag rule.
America doesn’t provide birth control aid to foreign countries. Whither feminism? What on earth is Nawas and any other American government official talking about? We can’t export the most fundamental means of giving women rights – freeing them from childbirth. What dangerous feminist thought are we in danger of imposing on Muslims, if we can’t even give them the means to control their bodies…nay, the FUNDING for the means to control their bodies?
Hell, we can’t even manage to guarantee this basic right in this country.
So the pretense that America is a) doing anything for women in the Muslim world; b) has the power to do anything for women in the Muslim world; or c) should do anything for women in the Muslim world – is all a steaming pile of horseshit. America does not support women’s rights at the political level. Muslims don’t support women’s rights at the political level. Nawas’s statement is therefore nothing but a collusion between the American political structure and the Muslim political structure to do nothing about the dismal position of women in the Islamic world, and then to pretend that this is done in the name of cultural sensitivity.
YET!
American feminists -those of the third wave, the wave without the spine- will read Nawas’s statement and cheer.
Yes, that’s what we’re all about. We, superior Americans, almost human, don’t think Muslim women are there yet. Why would they want freedom and rights? Their social structure is against it, you see. Thinking anything else would mean we believe feminism is actually superior to Islam, which, OMG, is so racist!
Right.
Lord, we are SO doomed.
Filed under: Feminism, Islam/Religion, Socio-Political
Nor is it the intent of American feminists to emancipate Muslim women through cultural imperialism. That white women have done this is a myth created by anti-feminists.
This always bothered me. They have one example, The Feminist Majority and Afghanistan. Wasn’t that one woman? Mavis Leno, Jay Leno’s wife? I mean, Jay Leno’s wife, please.
With one example, they try to discredit ALL OF FEMINISM.
I’m not comfortable with Nawas’ stated position either. I find it interesting, and more than a little disheartening, that Haim Nawas appears to be drawing a line between “American” and “Muslim.” I think it’s a false dichotomy that could potentially lead us down the road of deciding one to be “more equal” than another.
Also, who gets to decide what’s “right” for Muslim women? Nawas?
So, as a third-waver, I am not cheering. And yes, my spine is very much in order, horseback riding accidents and all.
I got another idea then, if our social structures are so different and stuff then why not let women who were raised in them and one way or the other got our feminist consciousness raised to have a minimum say in the issue, always bearing in mind that if we speak openly in our own socities, u know the one with the different social structures- we’ll get assualted, imprisoned, beheaded, gang raped- or all of that. Our social structures are different, they’re shit, more reason then NOT to defer to them. They are totally SHIT which is why the mid east and the muslim world continues to pump out millions of immigrants. Let’s play a game, seriously, ure a woman, now where would u want to live- ure income will be standard wherever u go by the way? Please fill in the boxes below:
a) Pakistan
b) Morrocco
c) Saudi Arabia
d) Indonesia
e) America
Now who DIDN’T say America? There, so lets have some honesty. The answer is to improve the quality of life in our countries- not cynically pander to the ruling forces that ensure our lives are totally claustrophobically oppressive.
But if u got so much guilt and misunderstanding, then the least u can do it get out of our way and let us speak up about what’s really happening and stop trying to use the carefully supressed feminist consciouness of millions of Muslim women and the brutally enforced silence of many many millions more- to effectively say, “See, no one over there has any complaints anyhow, that’s HOW different they are and how sensitive we got to be.”
Er sorry, we do. And why the fuck would u guys be so reluctant to swap places with us?
But ure not hearing us.
And u refuse to listen to people who escaped, immigrated or just got some sort of social immunity so they can say what they want in relative safety. Millions can’t. But don’t be fooled by the silence- unless you want to be, of course- which the cult of the “hurt Muslim male,” ennables.
So America playing any constructive role now is just a joke. Best u can do is let us do this on our own cos ure not listening to us, ure listening to western convert women, a kaleiediscope of black nationalist groups, sexual imperialist white convert guys blah blah blah- and patriarchal apologists who rule us and have always done so, so the thought of some top official coming to our countries to represent that kind of polity is FRIGHTENING. Americans, all ure information on women in the Islamic world is derivative of male sources or male orientated interests disguised very often as religion. There is a very good reason that 90% of comments on Muslim womens’ clothing are written by MUSLIM MEN, an indicator of what and who u are actually deferring to in reality. The only way ‘cultural sensitivity’ that would be morally valid now would be if all Muslim women were given an absolute right to choose how they want to live. If they wear the veil, never leave the house, have no say in who they marry- that all of this is done after free and open examination of debate and alternatives. No- cos the truth is if i take a book on feminism to Pakistan i will be arrested at the airport, that a guy in Afghanistan who downloaded feminist literature is now facing the death penalty- so what choice did these women ever make- apart from the fact that even thinking about this is enough for Muslim women to believe they have just booked a one way ticket to a molten lake of eternal fire where their skin will be roasted forever. Choice? There was no fucking choice- so ure cultural sensitivity is just massive social insensitivity- totally invalid, cos WOMEN HAD NO ROLE IN DEFINING ISLAMIC CULTURE anyhow. Fuck, millions can’t even take a bus ride without official permission from a male relative, choose who to love without getting hacked to bits or even vote, spare me that- even step out the house without being dragged into a cruising car, raped and dumped cos only ‘whores’ leave the house alone. Cultural sensitivity, er, u mean total cowardice. Face it, oppression of millions cos of caste, cos of gender, cos of ethnicity, cos of their ‘apostate’ beliefs, cos of landlordism, cos they’re a minority- that is now what u are ennabling cos u haven’t got the moral integrity to stand up and shout it down. No, allies like that, we don’t fucking well need thanks very much.
I don’t expect a response to this post actually from westerners cos i noticed that when people like apostate present u with the truth, not Jihad Watch pseudo fascist republican stuff, just the simple truth as experienced by women everyday, u great allies of real Muslim women just sort of stare open mouthed and SAY NOTHING.
One fucking day living our lives will burst ure bubble quick enough.
Can’t be havin’ no brown people gettin’ uppity ideas like our wimminfolk. Uppity brown wimmin… that’s just agin’ God’s plan! ‘T’ain’t natural!
Really sharp analysis of where some of the landmines are located in the feminist movement these days.
And yeah, where “sensitivity” and “mulitculturalism” just happen to overlap with not having to lift a finger, there’s usually a reason and it’s typically not feminism.
I don’t understand this post at all. You first seem to be saying that American feminists should be advocating for women’s rights in the Muslim world, and then that they shouldn’t. Maybe I’m dumb, but I am also dumb and mystified & confused.
In any case, why would Muslim women want freedom and rights? Why are we always talking about “what men do to women” in every fucking society on earth? Why don’t we talk about what women do to men? Let’s talk about THAT, apostate.
Right on – I posted on this too and came over to tell you and see you are totally ON it – I am going to get linked to this post right now.
And hooray for Jay Leno’s wife -she was a lonely voice speaking for women in burkas and helping them. She took a lot of abuse for her trouble. We should honor her.
Cultural imperialism is the right thing to do in areas where one culture is superior to another and the moral significance is great. At the very least, one should refrain from claiming moral equality when none exists. It is one thing not to help, and quite another to actively hinder.
The one thing I disagree with you about is that “we”(?) can’t do anything for Muslim women. If we have the will we can do plenty. Don’t let your left politics blind you to what women can do.
One woman in the state dept who is a real feminist, despite what the left demands you believe about her, has done plenty. ALONE, when we should have been with her. Condi Rice has a network of women fighting sharia and for women’s rights in Muslim countries, (see the courage award network). Rice has built women’s economic centers and domestic violence shelters and armed women’s police forces. 17 regional centers in Afghanistan.
During the first wave here women had no rights and took 60 years to get the vote. During the second wave we learned only one thing worked. Holding together with other women across race and class and religious divisions was what won our victories.. Males left and Right exploited those divisions to divide us and weaken our movement. When they were successful they won. They used women to attack and divide us. They are still doing it.
The job of feminists is to overcome divisions among women in order to help one another achieve equality. We must work together from within and without the Muslim culture. That is the power that will be strong enough to defeat political Islam.
See this, Condi’s site for Muslim Women:
http://www.state.gov/g/wi/
“So the pretense that America is a) doing anything for women in the Muslim world; b) has the power to do anything for women in the Muslim world; or c) should do anything for women in the Muslim world – is all a steaming pile of horseshit.”
Bingo!!!!!!
I do like this organization though:
Population Connection
Oh, and Apostate?
I can’t make heads or tails of this article.
A Textbook Case of Intolerance
Changing the world one schoolbook at a time.
By Anne Applebaum
Posted Monday, July 21, 2008, at 8:01 PM ET
I’m not quite sure what to make of Saudi textbooks (I don’t read Arabic) OR Anne Applebaum and the Hudson Institute
Might you have an opinion on it?
Great entry. I get SO SICK of the constant calls of racism if I ever dare imply Islam is inherently sexist. Some particularly fanatical people seem to have this strange idea that I am defending “western” religions, ie, Christianity, and comparing them favorably to Islam even when I never mention other religions in my opinion. It’s actually quite amazing the lengths these people will go with the intellectual-dishonesty in order to pretend not to get your point.
Human rights are not subject to cultural relativism. Women are human. That’s all there is to it.
DOWN with cultural relativism!
–Me
diana, this post is primarily about cultural relativism.
Actually, Mavis Leno was credible when she spoke about Afghanistan on The Tonight Show. It’s right-wingers like Laura and W. Bush who connect the War and “rescuing” Afghani women.
Breaking News
Pakistani ‘doctor’ crosses over, police suspect he is a spy.
“Highly placed sources told The Indian Express that to authenticate his claims of being a doctor, Jameel was questioned by civil doctors as well as military doctors to check whether he was really a medical professional.
“Yes, he was grilled by doctors. But, he answered all the queries to their satisfaction,” revealed Ganganagar Additional SP CID Ram Gopal Vishnu, who was among the officers who conducted the joint interrogation on Jameel. Vishnu added, however, that Jameel’s claims of “ideological suffocation” were difficult to buy, even though the illegal alien insisted that he had shunned Islam to become an atheist. ”
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/339053.html
PLEASE REFER TO MY POSTS UNDER THE NEWS ITEM
I apologize that I wasn’t clear.
When I said that I want to know why we aren’t talking about what “women do to men” I was expressing a weariness with the ubiquity of sexism and misogyny and WHY WOMEN PUT UP WITH IT.
I’m sorry to say this but I there is something masochistic about women. We put up with being wrapped in shroudlike garments, beaten up, dissed and foot-bound. Girls are killed at birth. Girls are fed less calories. Girls genitals are mutilated. And so on. I need not rehearse the whole sad panoply of female degradation here. You already know it.
So here’s my question: WHY?
I’m sick of this shit. I’m sick of feminism. I’m sick of even hearing intelligent women like Apostate talk about this movement which is not a movement but an affectation. I don’t deny the social catastrophe of sexism and misogyny. I think (as Gandhi said about Western civilization) “it’s a great idea.”
About the cultural relativism stuff, fuck that. If feminism meant anything we wouldn’t even be discussing this. We’d start an army, and invade countries that oppress women and kill the bastards who oppress them.
Wow, what a crazy idea, eh?
Why is it so crazy? The only way women will ever be liberated in countries like Somalia and Afghanistan is by killing their oppressors: that is, the male population.
PS in my ranting mode I neglected to copyedit my own work.
I think (as Gandhi said about Western civilization) “feminism’s a great idea.”
Other than that, I take back not a word. The only way that the oppressed have ever thrown off their shackles is by making it clear to the oppessors that they will lose something important (like, their lives, or their property). That’s why feminism can’t and won’t succeed, except fake feminism (”they treat us so well!”) in small doses in rich countries. Because women will never cooperate with one another to kill their oppressors, or to create alternative structures that devalue men.
There are strong women’s spirits everywhere who want to work for women’s dignity. Even in places like DRC where women and girls’ bodies are being destroyed every single day in the thousands, there are women (and a few men) activists working for their own bodies and souls and for those of their sisters. “We” are already infected by imperialism and racism when “we” think that we should tell any other country’s women how they should free themselves. If “we” want to help, all that has to be done is to support the activists who are striving to free THEMSELVES.
What a great post! Thanks.
Women are human.
When did this start? Shit, did I not get a memo?!
Nunya, the Hudson Institute is a ship of fools run by a Dr. Herb London. Dr. London is a moron.
I think it’s also important, in inveighing against “cultural relativism,” to be careful what you mean. “Cultural relativism” is often used as a misnomer for “multiculturalism,” and they’re not one and the same.
“DOWN with cultural relativism!”
Seconded!!
PS: Have you noticed how cultural relativism only seems to apply in regards to women’s and animal rights?
I find that very telling.
I just looked up Mavis Leno. I didn’t see anything controversial in the bios I found.
Can someone enlighten me as to what she did or said that was problematic?
Natasha, hi, i agree with what u are saying and I find ure call to solidarity and direct activism really appropriate. And let’s be practical, we need a co-alition, which will be broad, some people might have various views, and that’s ok, but we also got our core principals as democrats, liberals and anti racists. And I say this as someone who struggles with a kind of ‘racism’, specifically against Arab men Natasha, i can justify it if i want to…… but i am trying to fight against hate. Even someone like me, it’s like a kind of battle between light and darkness and i hear like a voice, u know, this sounds childish i know, but like i am offered the whole world- if only i will join the ‘powers of the dark side’, in other words- raise all out hell one day against Arab men. But u know, people who do that, like “Gollum” on “Lord of the Rings,” that nervous, hateful force eats them up. Now this sounds like foolishness, right? Natasha, i write this cos i want to show that when i stand for anti racism being included as a article of faith in our struggle, i do so very a deeply personal persepctive- which is hardly a sanctimonious one, or a preachy one, but one of someone who really struggles. I want at all times to be a better human being- and i think our politics can assist in that.
Apart from that, I have a duty to our communities in the west- to liberate them from the Jihadist-Sharia threat and empower them against the cultural relativist sell out- and any Fascist backlash or seeding of western societies for discrmination-deportation-genocide.All of this is linked globally, which is why, well I will shock you here, i believe Iran has to suffer a crushing military defeat folowed by implosion in order to demonstrate the disintegration of poltical islam; that and Bin Laden’s capture, cos if it was me, i would parade him in chains locked in a iron cage like a dog all the way to Ground Zero and then garotte him like Ceasar done with VersunGhetrix- which ended the Gaulish revolt.
Now is that not, hmmm, “fascist”? I don’t know, what i am saying is when I call for anti racism being central to our struggle, I am not doing so from a leftist sell out standpoint. I would say it sits well with Condoleeza’s Rice’s take, so u might want to label it neo con? If u want….
But i don’t think everything can be labelled or needs to be labelled. What we need to be sure on are our core ethical values, which means, we can not deal in any way shape or form with fascist-racist groups, ethically and morally.
Jihad Watch does Natasha, and that’s problematic, but i think the answer is instead of us going to them- they come to us and we rally our forces right here, right now. This means we are the movers-rather than the moved, the eladers- rather than the led, but we got to be clear on our core values.
Your totally correct, the right will never confront Islamism anyhow, so what’s needed are new definitions and new points of activism.And if u are really thinking about rallying everyone, then we need a very simple statement- and anti racism has to be in there.
I just read ure stuff and u see it as very black and white suggesting that all Muslims see us as infidels and want to kill us. I would say ALL Muslim men objecticify us, dehumanize us and sexualize even the most mundane aspects of our lives- but all Muslims want to behad us? No. This is not the case and i think u would know that. Most Muslims look for leadership from the west as a way to get out of the fucking mess we are in- and the west,perversely- defers to the train wrecks that are our social norms. Why? In Muslim countries students study Accounting, Management, Science and all that using western ideas, books, concepts- (even though we got our own traditions). There’s no relativism here? Muslims simply accept best practice in education, so why see us as “the other” incapable of establishing functional societies capable of normal and healthy gender interraction by the same token? Of course, that would mean confronting patriarchy- which the west is unable and unwilling to do, given the fact that patriarchy is the dominant force ruling the west; Relativism is self serving.
But still, in social issues, especially womens’ issues, many Muslims still look to the west, even as it retreats into relativism, even as it allows Islamist bullies to undermine its inner values- starting with Muslim communities in Europe, especially UK, who, Natasha, u got to realize this- NEED URE SUPPORT-NOT URE SUSPICION.
And some of those women will be Muslima, not niqbai lib Islamist ennablers, real Muslimas, ordinary believers, welded to their faith, gaining comfort from Islam, which is a right- cos we got to include freedom of conscience here as well in our statement of core values.
Natasha, think about this, the only way we can defeat Islam and oppressive religion- IS BY OFFERING MUSLIMS SOMETHING BETTER, by referring back to the dream as to why Muslims immigrated to the west in the first place, by offering them and working for a brighter and happier future.
diana.
Thanks! Although I dont agree at all with your conclusion (although I like it!) I love this that you write:
I’m sick of even hearing intelligent women like Apostate talk about this movement which is not a movement but an affectation. I don’t deny the social catastrophe of sexism and misogyny. I think (as Gandhi said about Western civilization) “it’s a great idea.”
You are bang on the money though, about even women with choices “putting up with it” (you are talking to one…sigh!)
The only way to defeat sexism and misogyny is for women to stop putting up with it….in our minds first and foremost . Very Gandhian philosophy by the way. Strong relentless passive resistance is much harder and much more effective than aggression, which only gives those fucking bastards more ‘kicks.’
As an aside, let me tell you about a Pakistani friend whose husband was petty, mean and abusive. She had to stay in the marriage for various reasons but her mental disengagement was brilliant – one day when her husband after an argument asked heatedly “Are you making fun of me?” she relates all she could do was say “Yes!” and really mean it, in a totally amused way!
We need to disengage and resist – no better way of saying “fuck off.”
Good critique. I think Nawas’s statement reflects the darker side of cultural relativism. Here’s well said: “To baldly state that what is best for American women — human rights — is not what Muslim women want is to simultaneously dehumanize and patronize Muslim women.”
I’m actually not sure though that the third wavers will cheer. Or, I trust they’re smarter than that.
This weekend, on both Saturday and Sunday evenings at 8pm, EST, Fox-TV will be airing a one hour documentary about honor murders in America. They interviewed me at length and you may see my face and my words on camera.
FOX was the only national media outlet that really covered the honor murder of Sarah and Amina Said in Dallas Texas early this year. Kudos to them for their interest in this subject. The crew told me that I was the only domestic violence expert willing to say that honor murders have something to do with….Islam and with Muslims.
The Fox team was utterly amazing: Friendly, professional, exceedingly well prepared. About six or seven serious men arrived with lights, cameras, and computers and they turned my home into a studio-quality locale. I was interviewed by the very beautiful and brainy Lauren Greene but as I now understand it, the program will also be hosted by Megan Kelly. Let me thank Justin Laffer and Byron Garoufalis for providing excellent backup.
I would welcome your views of the program and the subject right here at my blog.
http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/
I will watch that.
The crew told me that I was the only domestic violence expert willing to say that honor murders have something to do with….Islam and with Muslims.
In this day and age, we should be allowed to talk openly about Islam and comms of color. The Third Wave stifles thought and does not tolerate dissent.
We should be allowed to talk about it especially on the internet, a free-for-all.
“We need to recognise that the social structure in the Muslim world is very different from America’s. American women need to understand that what is best for them is not necessarily what is best for Muslim women. Advocacy of women’s rights in the Muslim world must show sensitivity to local political realities.”
yeah?! And why is that??
GC, I watched the show! Phyllis Chesler was great!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEkRIib__U0
Chesler: There is a very evolved political correctness going around in the world that does not want to say Muslims in any way are bad because they’re afraid this will make them racists and being seen as a racist is the very worst thing these days. It’s a parallel to 15 of the 19 Saudis who hijacked the planes and flew them on 9-11 flew them into the building weren’t real Muslims or weren’t good Muslims. I hope we are but you only have to kill 50,000 women every decade or 100,000 to keep most of the women cautious and submissive. Because jihad is on the rise and part of what jihad is about is totalitarianism and the subordination of women. If the Muslims who were terrorists hate the West the symbol of the West that they most love to hate is emancipation of women is women’s freedom here. An honor killling is not the same exactly as what we know of as domestic violence. An honor killing is planned it’s premeditated. So that often the perpetrators will back on planes to the old country before the body has been discovered.
Anyone who doesn’t speak up about oppression in any form is a coward and this includes sexism.
“…hate the West the symbol of the West that they most love to hate is emancipation of women is women’s freedom here…”
Of course. Without it they can kiss goodbye to slavery.
I don’t exactly agree with Chesler that there is a direct connection to Islam. Misogynist practices originate in local customs and political authorities and they are reinforced by religion. It’s like Catholic priests who molest boys. They’re an anomaly. Ministers and all kinds of adults molest children too but the abstinence required of priests reinforces the likelihood they will molest boys.
There is also honor killing in the US we don’t call honor killing such as husbands who kill wives who cheat on them or husbands who kill wives who aren’t “obedient” enough.
Since when American laws or Christian religious prescriptions says it’s OK to those horrendeous crimes?! What a weird comparison! No one who’s in full knowledge of both things makes such comparison, unless it’s taqiyya.
You don’t have any law in west like this:
Tabari IX:113 “Allah permits you to shut them in separate rooms and to beat them, but not severely. If they abstain, they have the right to food and clothing. Treat women well for they are like domestic animals and they possess nothing themselves. Allah has made the enjoyment of their bodies lawful in his Qur’an.”
And in DV cases in the west you do not generally see the mother holding the daughter down while the father, husband or brother kills her. Honor killings involve the whole family and the killer is protected by the family. Goldi something, the “stop honor killings” website owner always wants to say it is racist to pin it on Muslims; it is not just Muslims it happens in India too. But in India the killings are primarily economic, related to dowry and sustenance and not codified in the law. In Muslim countries they are about male control of women and the law permits it by various methods codified in Sharia (religious) law.
Two books by Phyllis I recommend are”Woman’s Inhumanity to Women” and “The Death of Feminism”.
Thought about that. Honor killings are parents killing children.
I’ll finally read a Chesler book.
the death of feminism?
why?
Feminism is not dead, on the contrary, there is still a lot of work to do for human rights of women. What are you talking about?
GC, wasn’t there some controversy about The Death of Feminism? It seems Women’s Inhumanity to Women is the more feminist book.
phew!!! how excellent to read your clear minded critique. You certainly have my support. It’s funny how we have no trouble owning up to the fact that not all cultures are equally valuable /valid when abuse of men is incuded- historically, apartheid in S Africa, China and Burma right now etc but just can’t really see the issue when women are the only victims; in those instances the problems are transformed by the magic of global patriarchy into “cultural issues”, amazing. Of course other concerns – usually financial – certainly help this sick alchemy. Could the US blind spot to human rights abuse ie ABUSE OF WOMEN in muslim countries have anything to do with oil, particularly Saudi oil? Hmmm.
Keep up good work apostate – all power to you
«It seems Women’s Inhumanity to Women is the more feminist book.»
I never heard of taliban women.
Donna –
Phyllis names the feminist groups and specific individuals she tried to enlist to help set up an underground for Muslim and all women escaping the religious patriarchies. We would have needed the cooperation of immigration and State to do this.
Feminists groups refused as they did not want any taint of the war, or the Condi Rice state dept to be associated with them. In other words, they put the man’s politics over saving women. Phyllis names names.
I had the same experience during the war . While underground shelters were being built in Afghanistan by REPUBLICAN women and women were being brought to US universities to protect them.
No feminist movement was there to help by pressuring for the secularization of those countries in their constitutions and administration. Bush gave ground there for expediency’s sake because there was no pressure group in the US to raise an outcry. It should have been the feminists and we should have had credibility because of our work with the women. But no we stuck with the boys on the left.
Phyllis calls it the Death of Feminism — that is why that book is controversial.
Also she describes her life married to n Afghani in a polygamous household. As usual she observes the psychology of the interactions and dynamics with devastating insight. She had to escape, which is why she feels so strongly for the women she left behind.
Ah. To go in with Bush’s war would affirm that war. That’s a tricky one because feminism already has an image problem. I can see how human rights activists act on principles alone.
Donna
Here’s the trick – feminism will never be respectable, neither will animal rights — too threatening to the mass cultural NORMs so women have to work for women and damn the rest of the stuff like image and respectability and academic credibility Bela Bela Bela — just work for women with women, for children, animals, and the planet.
Money and patriarchal power will always ridicule our work because it threatens the status quo power relationships, wants to equalize the power relationships. Why would power willingly give way until there is no other choice?
So they will ridicule and name call and laugh at us –feminazi – racists – but see what happened to Hillary? No one feminist can ever be respectable enough.
We will never be one of them and it is a sin to try at the expense of our sisters and our self. That is something feminists understand in their bones – name calling will not stop feminists. So when there were no free women to stand for Muslim women’s rights and secularization during the war, some of us in despair called that moment the Death of Feminism.
The primaries really clarified the values of democracy and feminism. It’s something I enjoyed about them. Acting on principles isn’t hard. It’s easier that acting any other way.
General Patton: To me it seems certain that the fatalistic teachings of Muhammad and the utter degradation of women is the outstanding cause for the arrested development of the Arab. He is exactly as he was around the year 700, while we have kept on developing — General George S. Patton: The War as I Knew it, 1974, p.49
oh, i get it! that feminism is dead, that feminism, not all feminism.
[...] 30, 2008 · No Comments More interesting stuff here. I’m sure you’ve noticed I really set my bombs so to speak in [...]