Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

Mona Eltahawy wrote: SO WHAT IS TO BE DONE?

First we stop pretending. Call out the hate for what it is. Resist cultural relativism and know that even in countries undergoing revolutions and uprisings, women will remain the cheapest bargaining chips. You -- the outside world -- will be told that it's our "culture" and "religion" to do X, Y, or Z to women. Understand that whoever deemed it as such was never a woman. The Arab uprisings may have been sparked by an Arab man -- Mohamed Bouazizi, the Tunisian street vendor who set himself on fire in desperation -- but they will be finished by Arab women.

Amina Filali -- the 16-year-old Moroccan girl who drank poison after she was forced to marry, and beaten by, her rapist -- is our Bouazizi. Salwa el-Husseini, the first Egyptian woman to speak out against the "virginity tests"; Samira Ibrahim, the first one to sue; and Rasha Abdel Rahman, who testified alongside her -- they are our Bouazizis. We must not wait for them to die to become so. Manal al-Sharif, who spent nine days in jail for breaking her country's ban on women driving, is Saudi Arabia's Bouazizi. She is a one-woman revolutionary force who pushes against an ocean of misogyny.

Our political revolutions will not succeed unless they are accompanied by revolutions of thought -- social, sexual, and cultural revolutions that topple the Mubaraks in our minds as well as our bedrooms.

"Do you know why they subjected us to virginity tests?" Ibrahim asked me soon after we'd spent hours marching together to mark International Women's Day in Cairo on March 8. "They want to silence us; they want to chase women back home. But we're not going anywhere."

We are more than our headscarves and our hymens. Listen to those of us fighting. Amplify the voices of the region and poke the hatred in its eye. There was a time when being an Islamist was the most vulnerable political position in Egypt and Tunisia. Understand that now it very well might be Woman. As it always has been.

A man can love his wife and still abuse her. He can have undying affection for his daughter but still wrong her in horrible ways. But, by going so far as to say they hate women, Eltahawy has dehumanized them. One recalls similar invective against Palestinian parents: they don't love their children. The message being sent is: they are worse than animals.

Women's rights is an area of concern in many parts of the developing world, not just the Arab world. Why single out Arabs? Women face major obstacles in India. Should we demonize the Hindu religion and the great Indian civilization?

[...]

By firmly pegging abuses against women to the Arab culture and Muslim religion, Mona Eltahawy's article was nothing short of bigotry.

[...]

As other pundits have noted, Mona Eltahawy is–along with Irshad Manji, Asra Nomani, Tarek Fatah, Zuhdi Jasser, etc.–acting in the role of the "native informant." Monica L. Marks writes on the Huffington Post:

These native informants just tell us what we want to hear. Their job is to increase hatred of Arabs and Muslims, something that is needed in order to sustain our multiple wars of aggression in that part of the world.

Anticipated Serendipity wrote:Very disappointing article. So does any and all criticism of Arab culture and religious extremism equate to bigotry? You can't argue with the hard truth that Arab culture is not woman-friendly, so instead you decide to basically argue that we shouldn't mention it because "Islamaphobes" and racists may use it against us and because the West is worse with its wars and what not. If an Arab woman cannot criticize her own culture for it's treatment of her sex without being labelled "racist", then who can? Simply ridiculous.


@Danios:
"There is no way to deny the basic premise that the status of women's rights in the Arab world is abysmal. Why then did Mona Eltahawy evoke such a hostile reaction from even the Arab women whose rights she seeks to protect? The easy answer, one that Eltahawy and her supporters might argue, is that these women are simply brainwashed. Too much "Islamism" in their little brains. The problem with this argument is that it's sexist. It's basically saying Arab women are too stupid to think for themselves."


She evoked a hostile reaction because Arab culture (like many other Eastern cultures) chokes its people with shame/honour. It's all about saving face and it's humiliating for the outside world to be aware of your flaws; not only that, but YES the women are somewhat brainwashed. There's nothing misogynistic about pointing that out. It's even more true when you point out that the average Arab woman is a lot less educated and a lot more likely to be illiterate than her Western counterpart. This makes it a lot easier for Arab men to control their women. They are socially programmed or "nurtured" to view themselves and their place in society a certain way by their CULTURE. FGM is abuse of an abhorrent kind and it is carried out by women – who've experienced the horror and know the damage first-hand – on other girls, not because these women are bitches, but because their culture has hardwired them to accept this barbarism and abuse as their burden for being women. Let the apologia by way of comparisons with high heels and the sexual objectification of women in the West begin...


"A man can love his wife and still abuse her. He can have undying affection for his daughter but still wrong her in horrible ways."


What??? Do you really believe that? One man's abuse is another man's affection? You're not going to deny that violence against women is widespread in the MidEast, you're just going to argue that slapping your woman around every now and then doesn't mean you don't love her and even though you've killed your daughter because she wouldn't marry her cousin you still have "undying affection" for her.


"Women's rights is an area of concern in many parts of the developing world, not just the Arab world. Why single out Arabs? Women face major obstacles in India. Should we demonize the Hindu religion and the great Indian civilization?"


This is a perfectly generic argument as you can use it against anyone. "Why single us out, look at them". If an Indian woman had said something similar I'm sure an article would have appeared somewhere in cyberspace saying something like "why single us out, how about the Arabs?" As an earlier commenter pointed out Eltahawy is an Arab and a woman hence the treatment of women in her culture is something that concerns her. There's no reason why we can't criticize Indian culture for it's downfalls.

Anticipated Serendipity wrote:
"Just as the viral Kony 2012 video drew criticism for reinforcing the idea of White Man's Burden, so too does Mona Eltahawy's article tap into historically racist Orientalist attitudes towards the Arab world"

Any criticism of the MidEast = orientalism. You didn't have to write a whole article to tell us that. That Kony business reinforced White Man's Burden? Really? I thought it was sensationalist and didn't see how it could achieve much, but subtly racist? Methinks your PC-crippled leftist pals over-analysed that one.

"By firmly pegging abuses against women to the Arab culture and Muslim religion, Mona Eltahawy's article was nothing short of bigotry. Indeed, one could hardly tell the difference between Eltahawy's article and what could normally be found sprawled on numerous Islamophobic websites, such as Robert Spencer's JihadWatch and Pamela Geller's Atlas Shrugs. It is almost a surety that her article will be approvingly cited on such sites, which pit "our civilized, freedom-loving civilization" against "those barbaric, women-hating peoples."

But this civilization is "freedom-loving" and relatively "civilized". What's wrong with admitting that? The MidEast is hardly a female utopia. Fact is fact, irrespective of who says it.

"...Why, for example, did Mona Eltahawy choose to publish her article in Foreign Policy, an American magazine? Why didn't she write it for an Arab/Arabic publication, with a primarily Arab readership?"

LOL. Do you think the type of censorship that is practiced by Arab publications would allow such an article? I'm almost certain something like this would attract death threats if it was written for an Arab publication. Lucky Eltahawy lives in America and not in Europe or she may have needed to go into hiding and travel with bodyguards for the rest of her life.

"We can continue to pat ourselves on the back for how civilized we are, how free our women are, how we are so much better than them. But, none of that will change the fact that we are the ones waging wars of aggression and occupation in the Muslim world. We are the ones killing hundreds of thousands of their innocent men, women, and children."

And this anti-war drivel has what to do with women's rights in MidEastern cultures? WE are always worse than THEM, right? Diverting attention from the issue being discussed is NOT a good persuasive technique.

"...To use a jazzy catchphrase of my own: mutilating a baby girl's genitals is horrible, but dropping a bomb on her head is much worse."

FGM is an ancient cultural practice. No ceasefires or peace deals are going to make it stop and there's nothing worse than being abused by those who are supposed to love and protect you. Furthermore, is it an aspect of Western culture to "drop bombs on baby girl's heads" or is that the unfortunate result of certain policies? Do terrorists hailing from the MidEast, and even governments in said region not deliberately target civilians thereby "dropping bombs on baby girl's heads"? Can the same be said for FGM? Is FGM not a reprehensible aspect of certain cultures (FGM is widespread in Eltahawy's native Egypt)? Is FGM practiced in the West by Westerners?

Talk about comparing apples and oranges *rolls eyes*. You can never miss an opportunity to badger on about how violent and destructive the West is, can you? So Danios, is no one allowed to talk about Arab issues? Must everyone join you in yapping about the evils of the West? Even after the bombs stop dropping, girls/women will still be suffering at the hands of the men their culture has produced.

desertdudeshj wrote:Awwwwww...... wittle trolly poo is upset. Time to change his diapers I think.

But I digress. On to Eltahawy ’s article, titled “Why Do They Hate Us.” The title sets off an alarm: the use of the first-person-plural. The first-person-plural can be appropriately used when the speaker has been elected to speak on behalf of the group they are speaking on behalf of. In this case, the “They” being Arab societies and “Us” being Arab women. Eltahawy ’s self-appointed representation of Arab women is neither professional nor accurate. While I sincerely value the freedom of self-expression and have not one single problem with her expressing her views, doing so on the behalf of all Arab women is enraging.
Her article presents a summary and background of the treatment of women in the region, paired with statistics and specific examples of cases from countries throughout the region, fluffed with emotional rhetoric, ending with a call for fighting against injustices. Every now and then, a different image of the nude woman with the body-painted Niqab interrupts the commentary, fueling the rage all over again.... The issue is framing and presenting women in the region as a monolith and pitting their struggles against the backdrop of an argument which points to “hate.” The argument dismisses the role of figures like Tawakul Karman, Zainab and Maryam al-Khawaja, and others — women who rose through the revolutions and were present in the public sphere during protests and demonstrations, standing alongside their compatriots demanding change and an end to injustices of all kinds. These women stood up as individuals and not as self-proclaimed representatives of Arab women.
Eltahawy points to “hate” as the source and cause of the injustices committed against Arab women. She scapegoats the rise of the Islamists, but Maya Mikdashi debunked that argument a couple months ago:
“Gender equality and justice should be a focus of progressive politics no matter who is in power. A selective fear of Islamists when it comes to women’s and LGBTQ rights has more to do with Islamophobia than a genuine concern with gender justice. Unfortunately, Islamists do not have an exclusive license to practice patriarchy and gender discrimination/oppression in the region. The secular state has been doing it fairly adequately for the last half a century.”
Yet, Eltahawy entirely neglects the socioeconomic roots of gender inequality, the rise of authoritarian regimes in a post-colonialist context, the remnants of dehumanization and oppression from colonialism, the systematic exclusion of women from the political system or those who are used as convenient tools for the regime. Full article: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/origina ... ot-re.html

The vast number of critiques written by Arab, Muslim, and South Asian women call attention to how Mona’s simplistic analysis and characterization of Arab women as “helpless” plays into larger discourses that have a real impact in the world, particularly in the way the US oppresses racialized people in Muslim-majority countries. This construction of the “helpless woman of color” who must be saved from the “dangerous man of color” has a long history of sexual violence, colonialism, and racism. As Andrea Smith explains in “Conquest: Sexual Violence and American Indian Genocide,” when European colonizers enslaved Native women, they argued that “they were actually somehow freeing Native women from ‘oppression’ they supposedly faced in Native nations.”.... If we look at the violent US invasion and military occupation in Afghanistan, we see how the legacy of colonialism continues when Afghan women’s struggles against patriarchy and misogyny are used as propaganda to advance war – one that continues to bomb, torture, and rape Afghan men and women. I don’t believe Mona Eltahawy is calling for the west to intervene in struggles against patriarchy in Muslim-majority countries, but I present these discourses and histories to show how critiques of her article are not “pointless” or “personal attacks,” but serious and important. Performing as a native informant is dangerous, not only because of the racist stereotypes it reinforces, but also because of the way it silences the countless Arab and Muslim women and men who have been fighting against misogyny and other forms of sexist oppression. Egyptian journalist and activist Gigi Ibrahim, who blogs at “Tahrir & Beyond,” writes the following in her response to Mona [read full]: https://muslimreverie.wordpress.com/201 ... y-hate-us/

kanelli wrote: Is her modesty being called into question by her husband? Are they living in France and she just wants to give the middle finger to the French authorities because of the burka/niqab ban?

desertdudeshj wrote:This is something that "white" folk don't understand specially so called feminists fighting for "womens rights"

There is no way to deny the basic premise that the status of women's rights in the Arab world is abysmal. Why then did Mona Eltahawy evoke such a hostile reaction from even the Arab women whose rights she seeks to protect? The easy answer, one that Eltahawy and her supporters might argue, is that these women are simply brainwashed. Too much "Islamism" in their little brains. The problem with this argument is that it's sexist. It's basically saying Arab women are too stupid to think for themselves.


The real reason that Arab women recoil after reading Eltahawy's article is that, while she tries to connect to them based on their gender, she attacks other aspects of their core identity: their race, nationality, religion, and culture. In fact, her racist (and somewhat babbling) screed is nothing short of a vicious attack on their entire civilization.

By attacking their core identity, Eltahawy has succeeded in alienating her own audience.

Imagine, for instance, an American feminist arguing for greater rights for African women, while at the same time assailing the black race, African culture, and traditional tribal religion. How receptive or thankful do you think these African women would be? How pleased would the black or African community be if someone was writing articles about how backwards their culture is?


Mona Eltahawy's article engages in trite, racial stereotypes. Legitimate problems in the Arab world are sensationalized. They hate women. What an absurd exaggeration! They have mothers, sisters, wives, and daughters–and it is reasonable to assume that, like other human beings on earth, they love them.

If you read the link given by eh - you'll see that he highlights the fact that Arab women came out strongly against the article for its stereotyping and hyperbole about all Arab men:

Chocoholic wrote: I do not understand why some men would manipulate the teachings of religion to oppress women - are they that threatened by women?

Father Jerome Murphy-O'Connor, O.P.:
1 Corinthians 14:34-35 are not a Corinthian slogan, as some have argued..., but a post-Pauline interpolation.... Not only is the appeal to the law (possibly Genesis 3:16) un-Pauline, but the verses contradict 1 Corinthians 11:5. The injunctions reflect the misogyny of 1 Timothy 2:11-14 and probably stem from the same circle.
New Jerome Biblical Commentary, edited by Raymond E. Brown, S.S., Joseph A. Fitzmyer, S.J, and Roland E. Murphy, O.Carm., Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1990, pages 811-812)

desertdudeshj wrote:This is something that "white" folk don't understand specially so called feminists fighting for "womens rights"

desertdudeshj wrote:she probably has a gun pointed towards her off camera !

kanelli wrote:How Muslim women can say it is for their religious beliefs I cannot understand

It makes the statement that women not covering are not as virtuous, and it perpetuates the notion that men cannot control themselves and are dangerous to women, so becoming invisible is the only way to protect one's virtue and honour.

I support the ban simply because the veil was created out of misogyny and further perpetuates it.

shafique wrote:I can't really see how choosing to wear a veil is the same s.exualisation and objectification of women.

shafique wrote: I still don't see why this is any reason for it to be banned.

shafique wrote:I guess that I am 'super liberal'

kanelli wrote:Is Mona Eltahawy white? How about all the other women fighting for their rights in the Middle East, Africa, Asia, North America, South America etc.?

kanelli wrote:Nucleus, I am 100% sure that some people are against Mona Eltahawy. All feminists who speak out about injustice and fighting for women's rights are looked at unfavourably by those who don't share the same view.

My final issue is with the publication itself. The majority of Foreign Policy’s audience is western. For them, such a shallow “analysis” will only serve to consolidate and confirm their suspicions and stereotypes about Arab men: the violent, sexist Arab men hate their women. The next step would simply be for westerners to come and save the poor Arab women, who in el Tahawy’s article have yet again been portrayed as victims. (Oh wait, this narrative sounds familiar.)

My point is that it is better to write a long, complicated article that few people will read; than a short, simplistic one that gets lots of attention but does absolutely nothing in terms of social justice or social change. What has this article done for Arab women? What solutions has it proposed?

desertdudeshj wrote:An interesting article in todays paper