RSS Feeds
Resize Text: 
Full text article
| Summer 2009 CommentsTwice Branded: Western Women in Muslim LandsEvery time I despair of the way women are treated in Muslim countries—and the few syllables Western leaders and op-ed columnists expend on their humiliations, mutilations, harassments, and, yes, murders—I turn to the Web site of Mona Eltahawy. Eltahawy spent her formative years in Egypt and Saudi Arabia ... Full text articleThis article is journalism at its worst. There are so many things wrong with it, it is hard to know where to begin. A starting point might be to inform the writer and the editors at World Affairs that referring to the Islamic countries, the Middle East, or Muslims as one homogenous entity, is not only irresponsible, it is just wrong. You must be aware of the way you are treating this language and the implications it has to uphold a simplistic and binary “us” versus “them” mentality about the world. Along with carefully selecting sources who are notorious for their anti-Islamic stances, Bachrach turns to the highly contested film “Not Without my Daughter” to bolster her argument that all Muslim men are in reality savages waiting to exploit the innocent Muslim, or god forbid, white woman. Again, her reference to this movie is laughable. You will find this movie as part of the curriculum in many Middle Eastern studies undergraduate classes, particularly because it is such a wonderful example of the Orientalist narrative. I don’t doubt that the stories that Bachrach heard were true. But the way she takes these stories, coming from radically different places and cultures, and trumps them up to the “customs and mores” of all Muslim-majority countries everywhere is simply journalistically irresponsible. Ms. Bachrach, I hope you take this critique seriously, and not as part of a “well rehearsed litany”. Your voice in the public sphere that actually finds its way into print, and you are only perpetuating stereotypes that are unfair. The point isn’t that there aren’t laws that are unfair to women, or men who abuse women…these things all exist, no one is denying that (by the way, I can guarantee you they exist in your own home country as well, shocking, I know.). Bachrach sarcastically references the people who would challenge her, and presumably because of their colonial guilt, assert that “you can’t lump all Muslim men together.” It is extremely significant that Bachrach brushes that statement off as ridiculous. If Bachrach really thinks it is possible to lump all Muslim men together as heartless predators, and that she has a privileged insight into every Muslim person everywhere based on the one year she lived in Cairo, this would be my response: Here in the US, many white supremacists lived not even just a year, but their entire lives in cities with black people in the Antebellum South. They also were convinced of their privileged insights, and were able to make sweeping statements about the “barbaric” and “animalistic” culture of ALL black people everywhere. It doesn’t sound so nice now, does it? Sorry, Misha, but your huffing and puffing about Southern racism does not change the facts. Islam is a radically misogynist religion.We in the West need to understand that and rail against it, whether that ' offends' Muslims or not. We're right, they're wrong. It's that simple, and we need to keep saying it, whether they like it or not. Hurrah for Judy Bachrach's straightforward clarity about the condition of women in the Muslim world. Clearly, Bachrach and "misha," the critical commentator above, have truth on both their sides. Women are frequently treated terribly in Muslim countries and communities, women are also frequently abused by non-Muslims, and some Muslim men are not the ethics-free monsters that Bachrach has reported upon. The more important cast, for me, is to look at how women are treated before the law in Muslim societies. If women are not afforded equal protection under the law, then the women so affected are, in essence, enslaved and abused thereby. Take the "honor killing" example; any law enforcement personnel, or the members of any community, that conceals or fails to pursue those killers are themselves accessories to murder and deserve to be shunned by all. To take as another example from the United States, religious communities that believe that God wants fathers to impregnate their daughters are not given any sympathy from the law; such child rapists are prosecuted and imprisoned without any regard to their heartfelt religious beliefs. This is the gift of the West to the world: a secular system of laws that ignores the multivarious religions and superstitions of the citizens to the benefit of the whole society. My father was a British serviceman stationed in Egypt during part of the Second World War. He remarked many times how oppressive and contemptuous was the language and the behaviour of the great majority of his comrades in arms when addressing Egyptian women. Two offensive racist and sexist words that have survived from that period to continue to pollute English usage are 'bint' and 'wog'. The blindness of commentators and journals like this one to the routine disgusting verbal and physical behaviour shown by Western soldiery towards inhabitants of countries that are bearing our military 'presence' tends to make the moralising look awfully like humbug, don't you think? ed from that period still pollute English discourse: 'wog' and 'bint' Thank you, Misha, for your thoughtful response to Bachrach's article. Likewise, I was appalled at Bachrach's homogenized version of Muslim men and what it means to be a woman in a Muslim country. I also appreciate your reference to white supremacists in the U.S. for this is really what Bachrach's article appears to be peddling: a racist, uncritical stance toward the other. I hope the editors at World Affairs takes notice. This kind of journalism is unacceptable. Thank you, Judy Bachrach. Poor Amit. Your anger is so transparent and sad. The fact is that Saudi Arabia DOES discriminate against women. Do you actually deny this fact? I lived in Australia in 2007 when the called the 8 rape victims "uncovered meat" during a prayer service. What a repulsive man. He should be sent to prison, raped and then perhaps he'll develop empathy. And as for you Amit, why don't you work on whatever country you come from and help women's rights if you think Ms. Bachrach's account is so poor? Make a difference. Lastly, you mention the Antebellum South yesteryear, the point being that it was a long time ago and the US has come way since then, hence Obama. Would a women ever become a Sheik of a ME country? Ha. Laughable. I think Ms. Bachrach has captured the spirit of Islam as it is personified by the actions of the majority of it's believers. Also she seems to cature the appeasing nature of the West through the diplomatic and academic views of Islam and Islamic countries. Where I live most women can tell stories of being groped on public transport. There are so many flashers around that no one notices them anymore. Gang rape is a daily item in the national press. The provincial press is full of accounts of fathers having sex with their daughters. Men who won't accept a refusal from a bride of their choice are known to kidnap her. Getting a divorce is long and laborious. Some aspirants simplify the process by murder. So- called crimes of passion motivated by jealousy occur regularly. But the country where I live is not Muslim and these events are simply considered crimes and not a national and racial blemish. I live in Italy. Does that make Roman Catholicism "a very primitive religion"? I lived in Cairo for a few years and I never wore a veil. I lived alone in my own apartment and took the bus to university everyday. I stayed out late and went dancing and drinking all the time. I made many good friends, both male and female--including several women university professors. Did I have incredible problems with sexual harassment in the streets? Absolutely. Sexual harassment and sex discrimination are alive and well in Cairo and I would love to see that problem addressed. However, I can't tell you how many times I have been followed/grabbed/called names here in NYC. So I'm really not sure I would say that sexual harassment is a muslim thing and it's irresponsible to say so. I'm not Muslim--I don't care to promote or defend it as a religion. All I can say is that the people there had varied and complicated relationships with religion. I met progressive muslims. I met conservative muslims. i met highly religious muslims. I met muslims who really didn't care. Muslims here and abroad are a diverse bunch of people--this article, like so many in the US media, serves to dehumanize and demonize them. There is enough hatred of muslims in this country without articles like this. What the author is writing about is not religion, but social structure: she is describing the role of women in a tribal/clan-based society. In the Arab world, Islam reinforces that social system, but it is not identical with that social system. This is very true to many women's experience of traditionally muslim countries. Very courageous article. A little bit of perspective: in terms of child custody, few nations in the world respect the rights of a non-native parent. My friend who married an Italian man has a very happy marriage, but she got US passports for their children in secret and hides them from her husband; she has also planned an escape (trains, not planes--too easy to get caught) if needed. She's not really paranoid; throughout modern Europe and the UK courts have consistently awarded custody of children to the native parent and do not necessarily allow the foreign parent to even have visitation rights. The US is the only country that allows for the existence of dual citizenship, and has been most active in assisting US parents to regain custody of their dual citizenship children, although often without much success. Misha's heartfelt attempt at rebuttal fails because it sets up a straw woman argument. It is unqualified, and uses the word "all" in grandiose ways the Bachrach does not. I have encountered this same critique from others, though I would hesitate to call it as a "litany." All these critiques fall back on the ad-hominem, "notorious," the insistence that things are much more complex, a passing admission that specific instances are true, followed by an immediate counteroffensive, "I guarantee you they exist in your own home country as well, shocking, I know." Finally, the reference to "Orientalism" reveals an adherence to the largely discredited, confused, and, intellectually dishonest writings of Edward Said. Of course we can judge other cultures. We do it all the time and rightfully so. Would we remain silent about a culture that practiced slavery? How about one that involved human sacrifice and canabalism? It is absurd to suggest that we cannot judge another culture for its treatment of women. Dana and others don't get the point. Ugly behaviour by soldiers and colonialists 50 and 60 years ago does not justify or excuse the unequal treatment of women under the law and in general society in Egypt and other Muslim nations. When the pot has changed its ways (i.e legally guarantees women's equality) it most certainly can call the kettle black. "In Turkey, 69% of all female health workers polled said violence against women is sometimes excusable." Can you please give a reference for this? I am a Muslim man. I was born and grew up in Kashmir (yes, the part of India "with the great Islamic population"). As a little boy I was taught the Quran, and told many stories from Prophet Mohammed's life. Mostly the stories were of how he was a compassionate and just person. Women played a consistent part in these stories. It would start with his mother who died young, and logically couldn't be a Muslim, and who we were told we must respect. Then came his first wife Khadija, who was a businesswoman, and 15 years older to the Prophet and in whose service Prophet worked; she has an exalted place in Islamic history. His last and ninth wife, Aisha went to battle as a commander of her forces, and assumes a a great place in the Islamic pantheon. There were many other women in these stories that became a way to teach Islamic ethics to young boys and girls (and who, it may come as a surprise to you, studied in same classes). There were stories about Jesus' mother Mary-Maryam-and about the sufi poetess Rabia Basri, about Abrahim's wives Sarah and Hajra-Hagar. When saying their names we were told to say "Hazrat"--the respected--before their names and follow their names with "May God be Pleased with Them", and the same for men. We were never told to half-respect women compared to men. Neither were we told that women are inferior to men--that would have been contrary to the facts that were right in front of our eyes, because girls always did better than boys. Yes there were more duties/responsibilities than freedoms/liberties--for both boys and girls--and I am sure being a boy I would never be able to understand how girls felt. One of the big reasons for the coming of Islam, we were told, was how Prophet had been greatly moved by the plight of women in pre-Islamic societies in Arabia, where women had been totally confined and shackled by their tribal societies. To bring them out into the public Prophet had introduced the veil. The reason given for polygamy--which was prevalent in many other societies as well--was that many men were killed in wars and the ratio of women to men was always quite high. It was said that a system be put into place where women could have a support system, and they could fulfil their needs, while men could fulfil theirs. But only men who could afford to support more wives could marry, and that too to a maximum of four times at a time. This system also ensured a little less confusion with the parentage of the offspring. Both the husband and the wife had a right to divorce at any time, but the man had to provide maintenance to the woman no matter what. Custody of kids was decided by a Islamic judge who was supposed to consider what was best for the kid, and who was a more responsible parent based on past behaviour. Of course, all ideas--even the bad ones--are not manifested in our everyday lives, and the religious texts and the societies do not sit on each other perfectly. The ingrained structures of patriarchy determine what kind of obstacles women face in societies, and most of the times religion has not much to do with it. At its time, Islam came with some pragmatic solutions to the problems of that era. These solutions might hurt our 21st century sensitivities, but it was a big progress then. It was sweeping social changes in the western societies along with women's resistance movements that bettered the condition of women in the west. Witch hunting and burning in Europe, or Sati in Hindu societies, may seem long ago, but in reality it is not. Not in the long view. No industrial revolution swept Muslim countries, and most of their societies were colonised by the west, and it was in reality this era when Islamic radicalism grew and women were caught in the crossfire of anti-colonial discourse of the Muslims and the objectifying gaze of the west, who had apparently come to relieve these women from the evil clutches of their husbands. The pragmatic aspect of Islam, which means solving contemporary problems in the light of Social Justice and Equality--which we were always told were the basic Quranic principles, has unfortunately been ignored by Muslim theologians. Unlike their predecessors during the medieval era they got stuck in literalism. Prof. Bernard Lewis too has, like these theologians, gotten stuck in literalist interpretations of Islam. On top of that he has become a textual determinist--who thinks Muslim men follow every teaching of the Quran to the last syllable. To understand "Muslim psyche" he goes to the Quran, and thus decontextualises them completely, compared to his overcontextualisation of Western actions in these regions. In any case, it would be unscrupulous to assume that 600 million Muslim men think and act the same way as Prof. Lewis and his friend Daniel Pipes think! Coming to my first sentence that "I am a Muslim man", I feel suffocated by this externally imposed singular identity. I am a Muslim, a Kashmiri, a Southasian, a dark man, a son, a husband, a brother, a feminist, a political activist, a dishwasher, a lover, a beloved, a thinker, a nobody, a somebody, and many more all at the same time, and sometimes each at a different time. If I am divided and confused into so many pieces, how can the rest of the 600 million Muslim men be so united in thought and action. I find myself very sympathetic to Mohammed's posting, even when I don't agree with all his points. There is certainly too much hate in this world, both toward Muslims and by Muslims. Unfortunately, even if articles such as this one may reinforce those who hate, the article itself seems true to experience, and it's excessive to suggest that what it "really" does is to peddle to racism. Responses to the article almost always run immediately beyond it to make some other point about Islam or the West. I must commend the letters editors and the writers themselves, though, for trying to conduct this spirited dialogue with some level of civility. In response to Inanma's comment earlier this afternoon, the author has provided this source: "Health Workers Facilitate Wife Beating," by Carol Forsloff, from DIGITAL JOURNAL on Feb. 1, 2009 (click here). Right, Pacopond, "Responses to the article almost always run immediately beyond it to make some other point about Islam or the West" An example would be your gratuitous slur on the late Edward Said. Dear Judy Bachrach, When you write "And Australia, where, after a group of unveiled Muslim women were raped, the succinct Mufti Taj al-Din al-Hilali explained away the crime as an attack on “uncovered meat.” - I believe you are incorrect. The raped women were not Muslim in that case that the mufti was commenting upon, they were Anglo Australians of a background not of Muslim, most probably Christian or Secular Agnostic, or Atheist. Whilst it is sadly very true that women are sometimes treated veru badly in some Muslim countries, the overall picture is somewhat more complicated. I live in Canberra, Australia, so my views are influenced by the situation in two developing countries nearby to Australia: Indonesia, and Papua New Guinea. Indonesia (population: 230 million) is the world's largest Muslim country. As a general rule, the problems that Judy Bachrach outlines are not major problems at all in Indonesia. Of course, women do indeed face important problems of various kinds in Indonesia, but many of the problems (not all, but many) stem from poverty and the underdevelopment of all types of institutions that is so common in poor countries. The situation is different in Papua New Guinea, which is nominally a strongly Christian country. In PNG, violence of all kinds against women is endemic. Melanesian men are not encouraged to respect women (quite the opposite), and the mistreatment of women is therefore widespread in PNG (and other nearby Melanesian societies). Surprisingly, this matter gets almost no attention in the Australian media at all. And successive Australian ministers make fine speeches about human rights at UN meetings but are generally silent on the issue of remarkable violence against women in PNG. Fortunately, after many years of silence, the Australian aid agency AusAID has recently released a report on this issue. Perhaps this is a first step towards official recognition in Australia of a huge human rights problems involving women in nearby countries -- countries which are not Muslim, but rather, are nominally Christian. The "uncovered meat" comment by Sheik Taj Din al-Hilali, which you quote, was made not in response to any attack on Muslim women, but after a spate of incidents in which young Lebanese Muslim men had gang raped (non-Muslim) teenaged girls in Sydney. Armchair opinionating is one thing, but nothing beats experience in the field, which Ms Eltahawy has in abundance and which Ms Bacharch is hardly devoid of. While I respect the nuanced reply of Mohammed, I have to say that every father I met in Kashmir when I was travelling there kept his unmarried daughters in purdah -- that is, under a kind of house arrest. I might add that many traditional Hindus in India do the same thing, especially in rural areas, although the tide seems to be turning somewhat. Some historians speculate that Hindus adopted these practices after the Muslim invasions of India, but I am not qualified to comment. Then there was Pakistan. When my wife ventured outside alone, she was (although veiled) propositioned at every step. Drivers stopped their cars. I might add that in Pakistani cybercafés -- where women were not to be seen -- the website histories were filled with pornographic sites. The hypocrisy is staggering. While there is a middle- and upper-class élite in Pakistan that gives at least some credence to the fact that we live in the 21st century, working-class and rural women are still completely or almost completely covered, let out only rarely, and will even turn their backs to passing vehicles as a sign of submission. The one glorious exception was in a series of three valleys along the Afghan border where an Indo-Aryan tribe ("pagans", in Abrahamic parlance) called the Kalash were holding out, after all these millennia, against constant pressure to convert. Muslim men enjoy taking holidays in these valleys, because Kalash women -- one of the great glories of humanity -- wear beautiful dresses, do not veil themselves, and even -- wait -- perform their traditional dances in public! Every night I would watch the Punjabi and Pashtun as they smoked and leered at these young women. And when then-President Musharraf gave a speech in the region saying that girls needed to be educated just like boys, half the men in the audience stood and walked out. Pakistan may not be Saudi Arabia -- possibly the lowest circle of hell on this planet -- but in most regions, for a woman, life is still on one of the inferior planes. When I worked for Amnesty International the "honour killings", though they did not involve prisoners of conscience, were high on the agenda and I am glad to see them mentioned here -- not to mention genital mutilation, another great atrocity. Finally, Iran. When my wife wanted to go swimming in the sea she was draped from head-to-toe, and overseen by a local patrol of armed morality police who did not hesitate to beat any women who didn't comply. Of course this is also the country where perceived homosexuals are hanged from cranes while spectators film it all with their mobile phones, and where women are stoned. Multiculturalism, sadly, has become an exhausted ideology that embodies the precise opposite of true universalism -- wherein all human beings, without exception, are equal under the same laws and enjoy the same rights and the same freedoms to determine their own destinies. Western countries still have their share of issues, but anyone who believes that Middle Eastern counties have remotely comparable cultural values, freedoms, and political institutions hasn't visited them. Unfortunately, women have not yet earned the status of other oppressed racial or cultural groups which, if they suffered from the same oppression, would inspire boycotts everywhere. And by the way, Western feminists -- like Western men -- are appallingly silent about this state of affairs. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all male chauvinist murder cults. Their so-called "holy books" provide the "divine" sanction for every atrocity committed by their adherents. Despite all their pious rhetoric, they have brought nothing but "evil" into the world. "Judge Judy: Judy Bachrach Plays Judge, Jury, and Executioner," MUSLIMAH MEDIA WATCH, Aug. 10, 2009 (click here for full article) The poster Mohammed has been taught, evidently, by practitioners of wishful thinking rather than scholars of the Koran. The "Prophet" encouraged men to marry women who "pleased" them, and to consider themselves as having the right to rape women taken as booty in the battles which he himself instigated. Not that I would really like to direct Mohammed to the Koran for instruction; it might make him turn nasty, as it has so many others. I have just come back from some Islamic countries, including Egypt, and was amazed at the ignorance Muslims have of their own religion, even as Arabic speakers and educated. Is it for their own sanity and peace they believe the white-washed version of Mohammed? After all, if they reject the violent message of Islam they might fall into dangerous doubt: doubt is punishable by death. What a mess, a tragedy and threat to all of us this "religion" is. Amit's sophomoric tirade, replete with all of the jargon post-modernist academics use to conceal the intellectual barrenness of their positions, is exactly the kneejerk sort of response I expected to find in the comments section. Instead of addressing, in any serious way, Ms. Bachrach's contention that the abuse of women in a wide range of Muslim countries is widespread, often draconian, and quite obviously part of the cultural mindset, amit instead attributes to Ms. Bachrach the absurd view that all Muslim men are savages. Ms. Bachrach is not claiming to have insight into every Muslim everywhere. She is claiming that she has some insight into a prevalent pattern of misogyny in Muslim countries. To claim that a person is intellectually irresponsible for pointing out such prevalent patterns of behavior is, well, irresponsible. Societies and cultures differ, and noting those differences, and the positive facts in virtue of which those differences exist, does not require one to have insight into every member's minds, nor does it require one to make a single universal generalization about every member of a culture, since everyone -- yes, everyone -- knows that such universal generalizations could never be true. But the existence of a conscientious minority does not falsify claims about predominant attitudes and behaviors among a group of people. I strongly suspect that amit is upset about the bare fact that another another has been criticized. This is always off-limits, unless the culture is a Western one, which are fair game for the kinds of "intellectuals" that Western culture alone has produced, and whose activities and criticisms would not be tolerated anywhere else. There were aspects of this article that niggled but overall the thrust of the article was 100% on target. The treatment of women in most Muslim lands is medieval, barbaric and unworthy. I do not know Ms Bacharach's other work and so cannot comment on her alleged reputation I see in the comments. All I know is that she has pretty well spelt it out in this article. I speak from many years of experience in Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states and other parts of the Arab world as well as Asia. Some points: The situation in Malaysia and Indonesia is somewhat different. The Islam in those parts, especially in Indonesia, is perhaps a little more relaxed, some might even say lax. That said, the push underway in recent years for a more literal and fundamental application of Islamic laws and principles is on the rise across the region. Not surprisingly, a major target of the fundamentalist trend is the condition of women. The main desire it would seem is to take women back to the Arabia of the 7th century. Honour killings in the UK are carried out by minorties such as the Sikh as well as Muslims. Some Hindu customs and traditions can also be very anti-woman. I have not been to Bahrain Airport for some years but I do not recall the seating arrangements mentioned. Bahrain is a pensioner client of Saudi Arabia and I would not be surprised if these arrangements were done to please big brother. Given the nature of Islam and the role of the Koran I cannot see anything ever changing. Judy Bachrach did not get her facts correct over the Australian women being raped as mentioned by other posters those young women were not Muslimah at all. It does not in any way excuse the rape or comments of 'uncovered meat' by Mufti Taj al-Din al-Hilali, whose disgusting comment sent shock wwaves through Muslim society. To colour a society/culture/religion as the author has in such a broad way is quite reprehensible, especially when on reads the comments of others who obviously seem to believe all she wrote. That is how fear and hate is perpetuated. There are bad/evil/in tolerant, ready to believe anything people in every society, culture and religion. We all should be trying to educated ourselves to arrive at understanding, acceptance and tolerance for everyone. Such articles only cause harm and distrust. Each society and culture should look in their own backyards and make sure their is no stain within their society and within themselves before shooting off at the mouth. In regard to Mr. Peter Byrne, my remarks about Edward Said's writing ("Orientalism" in particular) was not a "gratuitous slur," but a reasoned assessment of his most-read book. I have not had the life experiences of some of our other commentators, but I have read "Orientalism" carefully within the last few years. In the introduction to the twenty-fifth edition, Said remarks that "Anyone who teaches, writes about, or researches the Orient--and this applies whether the person is an anthropologist, sociologist, historian or philologist--either in its specific or general aspects, is an Orientalist, and what he or she does is Orientalism." (p3) He further states that "Psychologically, Orientalism is a form of paranoia, knowledge of another kind, say, from ordinary historical knowledge" (72) And finally, his notorious dictum, "It is therefore correct that every European, in what he could say about the Orient, was consequently a racist, an imperialist, and almost totally ethnocentric." (204 These remarks are arrant nonsense. Further, as I researched Said and his book, I came to agree with his critics such as Ibn Warraq, Keith Windschuttle, and Robert Irwin. The relevance to this current discussion is that Misha at the early part of this discussion accused Bachrach of being "such a wonderful example of the Orientalist narrative." I also see reference to the "objectifying gaze of the west." We owe such terminology, for better or worse--and I submit that it's for the worse--to Said's largely discredited, confused, and, intellectually dishonest writings. (Click here and here.) Lucian, you comments are simply full of ignorance. I assume that you would embrace modern day human rights laws. Where do you think those ideas came from? They did not emerge out of thin air, but from the Judeo-Christian tradition. Where did the first systematic attempt to end slavery come from? It was Christian evangelicals that pushed for it in Great Britain and in the US. Where did Martin Luther King find his ideas for racial reconciliation? Again, ideas were first found in the Bible, neither Greek nor Jew as the old quote went. Now these religions have not been perfect and I will be the first to admit that christian values were also used to defend slavery, but those views lost out in the end and no main stream branch of Christianity promotes them anymore. So, what would you rather have in place of the Judeo Christian tradition, the code of Hammurabi, how about some law codes based on Aztec or Inca beliefs? while studies highlighting the plight of women in Gulf countries etc., has started being documented, the focus also needs to shift to Asian region in a more concerted manner as well. Here the attention is yet to be engaged in such a manner. Lucian, I think multiculturalism is not threat to anything but the euro-centric worldview. You have travelled to the "Muslim lands"--Iran, Pakistan, Kashmir, and to the Hindu India. Many travelers from the West keep going to these places to see and prove what they have set out to. Many in fact follow a similar travel plan--in which India is compared with Pakistan, while Iran and Saudi Arabia is reached to arrive at a high-pitched tone in the polemic, then cadences and softer edges are finally seen in places like Morrocco or Malaysia. At each step the Muslims are measured on the civilisational standard that the White West has forged. I am not surprised that in Kashmir you saw "every father keep his unmarried daughter under purdah" because that is what you set out see. I know of a Kashmiri man who went to France for business and came back and said France lacks spirituality and purpose, and thus its culture is decadent. I think he too had gone there to prove his inherent superior worth, and the categories (standards) he used were ones that made him look better in his own eyes. Of course his travel or what he observed is of no value, for he is on the hapless end of the global power. In his utter powerlessness he could not even write about it, leave aside get discussed on a recognized public space. What you saw, is the only reality of Kashmiri women you could observe because of your inherent cultural bias, like the Kashmiri man's bias. You did not see how Kashmiri women are participating in the resistance movement against the Indian military occupation, you did not see how they are an important part of the public sphere. I know of dozens of women in my neighbourhood who are working or studying. My mother runs a school with almost fifty teachers--both men and women--working in it. There are tons of women who travel outside for studies or work. Muslim women run their own businesses in towns and cities, and in villages they work alongside their menfolk in the fields. The freedoms you are talking about, even the men don't have. Over the last 20 years almost 80000 men and women have died in conflict. Everyday life is a struggle, and all you notice is fathers keeping their daughters in purdah. By denying Muslim women a fuller description of their actual lived life, you are just using them as objects, as arguments, to invent evidence against Islam, but you are doing this in the garb of supposedly trying to help them. I have no love lost for any religion. I don't believe religion should regulate our lives or politics. I believe that secular world has solutions to our problems. But I don't think Muslim societies are religious; they are as secular as anyone else, in the sense that they conceive of their lives and their politics having their actual reference points in "this" world. Religion, as everywhere, is only a rhetoric which is used to organize society under a secular system. That America says "God Bless America" or UK supports the Anglican Church or that French national anthem speaks of "impure blood" doesn't mean religion or racism completely determines these societies. I understand a lot of things are passed under the cover of cultural relativism, and that ultimately it is the individual who matters, but if it is the individual who matters why should West as a culture attack Islam as a culture. Should it be people who build solidarities across nations and narrow conceptions of cultures, and not let cultures be reified? Multiculturalism is not simply cultural relativism. it is a positive affirmation and recognition of a self-formed or inherited identity of individuals. It is individualism of a higher order, where humans are seen as not just creatures with material needs, but as fuller beings who live and gain the meaning of their lives from their societies. Western writers think they know what goes on in a Muslim man's mind and in a Muslim woman's heart. By narrowing them into imposed categories and viewed from prejudiced lenses such kind of spurious scholarship will never serve the cause of justice, because it is inherently unjust. Several years ago I traveled to Egypt with another female. We were cornered, groped, and had men just walk up to us and rub their crotches against us while shopping. One shop owner threw a burqua over my friends head (for her to try on) and began rubbing his erect penis. Luckily we ran out of their, and many other unfortunate situations. I live in Philadelphia now in an area populated with many Muslims. When I had a yard sale recently one Muslim man grabbed my arm and said, "there is no one home at my house, you come with me, five minutes!". I am regularly leared and gawked at by the Muslim men gathered at the local coffee shop while their wives struggle with a couple children and and a stroller and a burqua on a hot subway ride somewhere. We only have one bar in our neighborhood because the Muslims don't believe in drinking and their Mosque is too close by for a bar to be near there. I find it disgusting that I am asked to tolerate their intolerance, be open minded to their close-mindedness, and to respect their culture when they regularly debase myself and other women. Sorry, Misha, you're weak attempts at accusing Bachrach of bad journalism and stereotyping don't have a leg to stand. Thank you for this article. It is very easy to scan a history of recent events in any country and select those that fit your thesis. One could take stories about wife beating, murder, rape, forced prostitution etc from the Western media and string them into a sensationalistic news story, and someone who had never lived in the US would have no idea that the stories don't reflect everyday life. Of course there is vast discrimination against women in the Muslim world. There is also vast discrimination against women in South America, Africa, Japan, India and China. There continues to be discrimination against women here in the US (along with rape and forced prostitution, neither of which are yet really taken seriously by our judicial system). I particularly find amusing Phyllis Chesler's personal story. Her in-laws didn't like her, and this has prompted her to go on what appears to be a lifelong crusade against Islam. What a load of hatred and lies. My German wife is the one who insists on us living permanently in Cairo. and it's for none of the reasons you mentioned. I find this article offensive picturing life in the west as heaven for women and life in muslim countries are hell. I mean look at the quoting you put in the beginning of your article about school girls being burnt to death. I mean can fantasy go further than this? I mean don't you have any logic, I mean any one with common sense would reject such fanatsy story probably copied over the internet from some Arab gulf tabloid that is notorious for fabricating stories like those for western readers who love this crap. But then again you're source is Mona Altahawi how knows which cords to play on to get around in western media. I mean she presents her self as a female muslim, and builds her whole journalistic analysis from this point , while we're yet to see any evidence of the fact of her being a Muslim. for those reciting cases of sexual harassment in Egypt, It has nothing to do with Islam. It's more of the lawlessness in Egypt, because all the Police and law enforcement agencies in the country is so busy oppressing opposition to a dictator endorsed by the west . civil rights in Egypt has taken a nose dive, and among them the safety of people against crimes, and of course one of the most horrible crimes of all is sexual harassment. I fully agree with the people who say Western feminists have been too silent on these issues. However, I am not one of them, but I have paid a large price. One of the reasons too few people speak up about these issues is because doing so almost certainly puts them at risk of threats, violence, ad hominem attacks, and other behaviors that make life miserable. I've noticed Judy is already having to defend herself against others in the blogosphere who are now accusing her of Islamophobia and worse for having dared to comment on the status of women and stand for basic, universal human rights. Why would a Swedish woman move to Bogota, Dubai or Omaha? sounds “barbaric” and “animalistic” juliet Judy Bachrach's article is spot on. I am an American, a sociologist by training, who was also a student of Arabic and Islam. I admire Islam and for a long while considered conversion. For most of the last twenty years I have lived and worked in Muslim countries in North Africa, the Gulf, Pakistan, and now Malaysia. Ms. Bachrach describes a set of sociocultural phenomena which are undeniable to anyone who has spent time in the region. It has very little to do with religion and practically everything to do with a backward, misogynistic, and repulsive side of Muslim societies. Any Muslim who denies the attitudes and actions described very aptly by Bachrach is simply being disengenuous -- most likely out of simple embarrassment. My French wife lived in the U.S. for eight years, during which she was not once the victim of any sexist comment or obscene language or gesture. During our years in the Muslim world, however, it is almost a daily occurrence, even when she is in the company of our young children. Pakistan is the most vile of such societies, where wife-killing and child rape seem to be the national sports. I do not condemn Islam for such behavior, for the miscreants who behave in such a way no little of their own religion. For many years I have found myself repeating a quotation from a Muslim convert whose name I've forgotten: "Thank God I discovered Islam before I discovered the Muslims." To those who point out the moral failures in Western societies as proof of our hypocrisy, I will admit that the actions of people of all societies fall short of their cultural (and religious) ideals. But a lifetime of study and observation have shown me that in Muslim societies today this gap between ideal and daily reality is wider than in any others. I congratulate Ms. Bacharach for illustrating this point with clear, if uncomfortable, precision. Let's not be afraid to call a spade a spade. This article is extremely prejudiced, biased and is de-facto racist. Replace Muslim with Jew or black in the article to see the degree by which this author dehumanizes and demonizes her subjects. It is one thing to raise awareness about discrimination against women in other countries but another to engage in this vicious hatred and demonization of the other. The author has every right to speak about her experience but she has no right in accusing all of us of being the same. Shame on The world Affairs. This promotes prejudice, hatred and bigotry against Muslims. Every other week, an anti-Muslim hate crime is committed in the US. Only this week, a man in Smithtown, NY tried to run down with his car a Muslim mother and her daughter and threatened to kill them while shouting anti-Muslim slurs. A week earlier, a store in Philadelphia owned by a Muslim woman was vandalized and completely ransacked and left with "anti-Iranian" graffiti. 2 days ago, a taxi driver in Pleasanton, California was beaten (facial cuts and a broken tooth) by two men who called him a terrorist and a taliban. Where is this going? wait for the internment camps? Shame on the World Affairs. The anonymous Pacopond illustrates the dictum: "One reader's research is another reader's exercise in tendentious quotation." The ire against Edward Said demonstrates that he hit where it hurt. One would like to know which of the over forty Islamic countries these armchair, tenured experts have an intimate knowledge of. It's significant that they swallow whole the fantasies of their doyen, Bernard Lewis, who led George Bush into his murderous Middle East fiasco. Im muslim and arab and dont cover up , I visited Egypt 3 times and i wore either capri or shorts and tee shirts and no one bothered me nor groped me . Yes there are bad people everywhere and women can be groped everywhere so why generalize so much as if Cairo has become hell. i will continue to visit Sharm al sheikh and egypt . Thank you for this incredibly enlightening article. I recently spent several months in Uganda and experienced the lewd comments and prejudice against white women. Your comment that it is abhorrent to respect awful behavior is spot-on. As a proud Muslim apostate, let me add that I enjoyed Judy Bachrach's article (although I found it too anecdotal). But what saddens me is the reactionary spirit manifested by a pro-Islam group of commentators here, generally categorized as the "convenient convergence of leftwing postmodernism and righwing Islamism", that are willing to blame the West, Eastern culture, even the Muslims, all in all to absolve Islam and its brutal founder. Such a state of intellectual infirmity where all of humanity can be criticized except for an ideology (also known as a religion) along with its founder that married a 6 year old but commanded humanity to follow his example for the rest of eternity (at the risk of the sword) - such a state of intellectual cowardice - is what has saddened me. I did not escape the brutality of the mosque, of the mulla, of the religious police, and of the Basij - to come to the land of freedom - just to hear the anti-enlightenment tell me and others not to criticize this backward and unethical religion. May I ask Misha and those who see no wrong in Islam due to lack of empirical knowledge - to stop acting as the proverbial bowl that is hotter than the soup - and study this religion with an open mind, and ask themselves if they wish to grow up or wish their children would grow up, under its indoctrination. Intellectual cowardice is of no service to an open society. Matt: I am not sure what you are on about, since I mentioned neither Judaism nor Christianity in my post, but recounted only what I saw with my own eyes in Muslim regions. You seem to have attributed my name to some other post entirely. Mohammed: Once again I appreciate your nuanced comments. I will take your word that the situation of Kashmiri women is more varied than my comments may have implied. But you are mistaken about something: I did not travel to Kashmir (or anywhere else, for that matter) with the intention of proving my own cultural superiority or seeing things from a particular point of view. Moreover, I did not comment on the plight of all women in Kashmir: I simply stated that all the men I met (I can't give you an exact count, but quite a few) kept their daughters in purdah. I didn't know what this word meant before I travelled there and I had no idea in advance what Kashmiri fathers did or didn't do with their daughters. The situation started on the houseboat we were staying on, when I noticed that the family's daughter was kept on an adjacent boat and never allowed off of it -- especially if I was nearby. If I happened to see her on the other boat by accident she immediately covered her face. So I decided to ask other men I met, and with whom I had already had conversations about many others things, if they did the same to their daughters. They did. I'm not saying that every Kashmiri man does this; I am also not saying that older women are subject to the same conditions; I'm reporting what I saw. The relevant point is that purdah does not exist among modern Europeans or Americans, except -- possibly -- in extraordinarily bizarre and isolated cases. Universalism is a Western phenomenon. It did not always exist in the West and it has taken centuries of Greek, Roman, Enlightenment, and yes, Judeo-Christrian ideas (I just realized that Matt must have been commenting on the post that came after mine) to mature to the point where we are today. We aren't perfect. But you cannot relativize certain things. If some cultural relativist, for example, can tell me how criticizing the excision of a young girl's clitoris is invariably the perverted view of some cultural imperalist who doesn't know how to "tolerate" differences and "diversity", then I'd like to hear the argument. But I'd recommend that he or she have a look at photos of mutilated vaginas before attempting to do so. Similarly, either a woman has the power to choose her own destiny or she doesn't. There may be some gradations of this according to culture, but the broad lines between Western and Muslim societies are clear. I have yet to see a convincing argument that having someone else make choices for you -- especially when you are beyond the age of consent -- is somehow superior than your making them yourself. And when was the last time a 12- or 13-year old boy was made to succumb to an arranged marriage to a woman three times his age? Lucian Aychenwald, I appreciate your comments. We need more people to speak out against these abominations. Thank you. Robert Kagan wrote about how statistically women are much safer in Iran than in the United States. "none of this behavior is either singular or surprising. It is the way men in most Islamic nations prefer things to be" as a reader im getting the notion that in "Muslim lands" girls are always left to burn in schools fires, that muslim men are more like animals always harassing women, and of course on the other hand western/non-muslim women in "non-muslim lands" are facing no such problems whatsoever. "85 percent of all Egyptian girls have endured this procedure" says who? is that even true? and if it is, does that mean that 85% of muslim girls are circumcised? you would think so, considering how general the language used is. the tremendous amount of generalization is obviously led by an outright hatred toward islam. the fact that Judy wrote this article driven ONLY by emotions makes the article full of bullshit. and im not even a fan of islam. hell im an atheist. @juliet about your experience in Egypt. ever heard of police? and dont you think you are exaggerating, call me naive, but i just cant imagine a guy groping you and rubbing his penis while shopping. what did you do? as for the muslims in your neighborhood no one has asked you to tolerate them. we wouldn't tolerate them. The publication of “Branded Twice: Western Women in Muslim Lands” by Judy Bachrach in the summer issue of World Affairs, a publication with an extraordinary editorial board, is discouraging. While the author has had a certain set of personal experiences in the Muslim world, other women would certainly provide a different story. That, however, is not as troubling as the assumptions made about these societies as a whole. The article contributes little information, and certainly no analysis that your well-read audience isn’t already familiar with regarding some truly abhorrent crimes that unfortunately continue to take place in Muslim [and other] communities around the globe. It is discouraging because one would have hoped that your magazine would get into a critical part of this story, namely, what Muslims themselves are doing in these societies to deal with these horrors. Every day, non-governmental organizations, clergy, community leaders and local governments join women activists to attack these practices. Even in socially conservative countries, shelters for battered wives and girls threatened with murder are opening, law enforcement officers are being taught to take their worries seriously. Muslim and Christian clerics join medical experts in demonstrating that FGM, an ancient Africa practice, is not only harmful, but religiously unjustified. Likewise, in tribal societies where it is not thought to be a religious practice, alternative rites of passage to womanhood are replacing FGM, thanks to grassroots activism and determined NGOs. Women are in the forefront of these activities, as they are in many human rights and development issues. They are making important gains because they work discreetly within and exploit local traditions to their advantage while avoiding the charge of being manipulated by outsiders. Their stories need to be heard as well. It is time for serious periodicals to look beyond the obvious to the real story, which is that Muslims, living in either traditionally Muslim societies or in the Diaspora, are individuals imbued with human agency and fully capable of fighting injustice and ignorance within their own communities. It is most likely that there are numerous scholars and activists who would be happy to contribute to the knowledge of your readers about how change is won. At a time when an accurate understanding of other societies and cultures is critical to our own national security, it should be an imperative to get this part of the story to your readers. yes, it certainly is a "PRIMITIVE, BACKWARD, VICIOUS" religion. just how primitive should have been demonstrated by 9/11 and thousands of other murderous attacks on non-believers. it is all in the koran, in plain sight. what fools the multiculturalists are, the "we must respect other cultures" and so forth. the culture of islam is vicious , predatory, barbarbic. and when it becomes solidly implanted in the west, as it intends to do, one way or the other, then comes the awakening. but too late. This is in response to Amit's comment about Islam being a primitive religion. There is a Hindu Taliban that operates in India. Click here. "In Jerusalem, ultra-Orthodox Jews have set up “modesty police” who terrorise young women who talk to men or show ordinary parts of their bodies. They break into their homes if they are seen with men; they force them to sit at the back of the bus, away from the men; and they even, in one recent instance, sprayed acid in the face of a 14-year-old girl." This is from the Newstatesman (click here). Imagine what Israel ruled by the Orthodox Jews would be like. Would it be much different from Saudi Arabia? What a ridiculously myopic, stupefyingly reductive article! Since the author already quoted Ayan Hirsi Ali, perhaps she should have searched for quotes from other "insider" Islam-haters, like that revolting Irshad Manji. Seriously, this kind of "liberationist" trash, whether written about the treatment of women or gays in the Muslim world (talk about a broad category!), is pure catnip to the right-wing, who is always more than happy to propose that, out of love for the civilian population, we bomb the shit out of these backward countries in the name of peace and civilization. This was such an intellectually lazy article. Shame on the editors for deeming it worth reproducing here. Bravo! Ms. Bachrach has pointed out the terrible position of many women under orthodox Islam. It is so sad to see the furious reaction of many Muslims to her article. Can Islam not take any external criticism? I lived in India for a time and I must say that western women frequently were insulted and "grouped" by Hindus men as well as Muslims. Same logic : modern western women can be regarded as "raw meat" Of course I know of many fine intelligent Muslims living in the US who would never abuse women. Still, the women suffering under orthodox Islam have found one spokesperson in Bachrach.I cannot believe my eyes that someone could write something like this. How biased and narrow minded can one person be? I am married to an Egyptian and I would relocate to cairo tomorrow given half a chance. i have lived there before and found it a far safer place to be and raise a family. very sad and very dangerous. This article lists western countries not being good enough in their responses - which is reasonable, but gets at least one wrong. The rape (gang rapes) in Australia. The rapists, not the victims, were muslim. When they argued that their culture led them to view non-muslim, unveiled women as available, they were told (even by some fellow muslims) such opinions were not only wrong but abhorrent. They are now serving many years in jail. The "meat" comment was about another rape, not including muslims at all, and the pulic response was as condemning of such stupid opinions as before. The man who made the comment is notorius for such things & mostly viewed as a nasty crank - and is not, as this article seems to imply, supported by Australian law or public opinion in any way. This is journalism at its lowest level of objectivity and analysis. In fact, it has inspired me to write a similar article addressed to the Arab-Islamic world exalting how wonderful Western men are in their treatment of their girlfriends and wives. But people there don't need finely crafted articles like this one to persuade them how civilized and superior Western men are in their treatment of their women. All they have to do is turn on their TV’s to Fox News to catch the latest barrage of news clips about the woman who just escaped from her 25 year captivity as a child sex slave in a basement of some California suburb, the jealous man who sliced his wife to pieces in an “honour killing” to protect his fragile male ego because he suspected she was having illicit relations with the neighbor, or catch the day’s Dr. Phil show with the man lecturing how it is his right to beat his wife and control her every move. It may sound outrageous, but as a Westerner living in the Middle East, people (men and women) come to me daily, asking me about something they saw on TV and simply can’t understand why Western men hate women so much to do all these horrible things to them. I try to tell them these people aren’t normal, mainstream Westerners, and certainly aren’t following the teaching of the Christian faith. Maybe the people this article is accusing aren’t mainstream Muslims, following the Islamic faith either. Bottom line, there are a lot of messed up people in the world. Journalists have the right to report on them, and explain to their readers how they justify their actions from whatever religious, cultural, or ideological framework they cared to distort. However, for a journalist to jump on the bandwagon with these people and blindly agree with them that their religion justifies this without any independent scholarly review of the contrasting opinions on the matter– that amounts to little more than sensational media propaganda, and no journal which wishes to maintain a reputation of intellectual integrity should ever allow such a mockery to be published. I spent time in Algeria in the mid seventies when the country was a dynamic, socialist, secular state eager for progress. As a western woman, I traveled extensively and met nothing but respect and friendship. Even in crowded markets, I was never verbally abused or harrassed in any way. Sadly this beautiful country has fought a long, bloody and tragic battle against islamic forces that want to drag its society into the 12th century. To disenfranchise the women and remove them from their careers. To force them back to the veil. There is a deep rooted underlying mysogyny in the three Abrahamist faiths. Why are they so afraid of women's spirituality and sexuality? I would love to know. |  Submit Your Comment |
Posted by amit | August 11, 2009 5:54 AM EDT