Some time ago I received a request to write something about wearing the Hijab (Hi there,Islamic Feminist). I have procrastinating writing blog posts a bit since. Many white people have written about about other cultures then their own and messed up royally. They have made assumptions without checking facts, they have colored their texts with blind ignorance and have proven that they could only think in stereotypes.
This is of course not true for all white writers. I have read enough texts that treated other cultures with respect and were carefully researched. However, such writings are far and few in between much of the damaging, hateful and ignorant works out there. Since becoming a feminist, I am all too aware of the damage that has been done and is still being done today by inaccurate literature.
This makes me hesitant, as a white feminist, to write about cultures that I did not grow up with and have little to no personal experience with. There is, in my opinion, one thing more damaging than lies and stereotypes, and that is silence. So I have decided to write something after all, but I will do that from my own perspective and experience and with the acknowledgement that I do not know more about Muslim culture than Muslim women do and that I can only give an opinion about what I have observed.
I will start with a personal story that I am still ashamed off:
It was a lovely spring day and I was sitting on the edge of a fountain, eating ice-cream. People were walking by and a woman with a child drew my attention. I didn’t mean to stare. There was absolutely nothing different about this woman. She was getting her groceries and strolling along, like everyone else on the marketplace. What caught my attention was her outfit. She was wearing a long flowing dress and she wearing a scarf on her head.
A thought formed in my head that she must be a Muslim woman wearing a Hijab and I was immediately ashamed of the assumption. I had no way of knowing if she even had a religion. My second thought was that she was forced to wear that. I had no way of knowing that either. Not unless I asked her personally. Here I have to think back to a picture in a newspaper days after the bombings in London. It was a picture in a train-station and woman was walking there, wearing a long dark dress and a dark scarf on her head. People were staring after her like she was a walking bomb.
As a feminist, I know better. I spend a great deal of time educating myself about the myths of stereotypes, especially those regarding women and yet I still have a tendency to judge women by their appearances. Despite my awareness of what society has taught me, I constantly have to work on not thinking along these stereotypes. I know how damaging these stereotypes can be. I know that the more people believe these stereotypes, the less chances women have. The result of inequality has directly lead to the deaths of a lot of women in the past and is still putting many women in danger every day. I am still looking for ways to fight the stereotypes, both around me as well as in my own head.
The image of an empowered woman, according to western society, is a white, thin, younger and “pretty” woman. She performs certain beauty rituals on a daily basis, because she “takes care of herself”, she “doesn’t let herself go” and she wants to be a “healthy size”. This is what we learn from a very early age. (Take Barbie for example, a doll that was created for girls to mirror their future adults selves in).
When we (white) westerners look at a woman who doesn’t fit this image, when she wears for example a Hijab, we have a tendency to feel pity and afterwards distrust for her. Without knowing or even caring why a woman makes certain clothing choices we make assumptions like we have the right to know the reasons for every woman’s appearance.
We have created “images of empowerment” and when a woman fits that image we don’t feel the need to look further. However, when a woman does not fit that image “there is a problem”. All of a sudden it becomes harder to pigeonhole her. So what do we do? Ridicule is a frequently used tool to shame women into conformity to the “comfortable, safe image” of what western society thinks a woman should look like. Often oppressive tactics are used to force women to hide the perceived signs of oppression.
In 2004 France outlawed the “display of religious affiliation” from public schools. This was followed after a debate about girls wearing the Hijab, though not because there were children wearing crucifixes around their necks.
In The Netherlands, during the recent European elections, a newly founded right-wing party has been gaining
in popularity. Their main political agenda is to send “foreigners back to where they came from”. Here I am paraphrasing, cause they wouldn’t dare put it so bluntly. However they have “expressed their concerns about the “Islamizing” of dutch culture”. It basically comes down to stopping the Islamic religion from gaining anymore members in The Netherlands.
I am still wondering what they are so afraid of. That Dutch Muslims will take up arms and force (white) Dutch people to join their religion? They claim that they are “helping” Muslim women by “putting a stop to oppressive rituals” such as sex-segregation, because “we don’t do that here” (yeah right). Of course none of the members of their extremely small party has actually bothered to talk to Muslim women and ask them what it is that they want, yet all the members are convinced that they are doing these women a favor and are surprised that anyone could question their motives or their actions.
And yet, other cultures prove that the image of the “ideal, happy woman” is completely artificial and has nothing to do with “health”. In Mauritania the image of empowerment is that of a fat woman. Girls are force-fed beyond the point of vomiting. Women buy illegal drugs in order to gain as much weight as possible (which is completely the opposite of western society, where women often go to unhealthy lengths to lose as much weight as possible). “A fat woman makes a home” the saying goes. A man testifies to the advantages of having a fat wife:
“A fat woman is a woman who is well treated by her husband. She is well cared for.”
So it basically doesn’t matter if she is mistreated, as long as other people can’t see that it is all OK.
Whether women starve themselves or eat, sometimes almost literally, to the point bursting the result is the same. She gets weaker and society applauds her “success”. She “looks healthy” so that is all that matters. When we can see “empowerment” on the outside we can relax.
So with laws we can make women take of their head-scarfs, shame them into either losing or gaining weight and “dress-codes” can force women to adhere to other “beauty” mandates as well. All that combined doesn’t imply much freedom, but seeking out freedom for ourselves as women can come at heavy costs, such as harassment, sexual assault, job and wage discrimination and being ostracized in communities. All this seems to send one basic message almost everywhere in the world “comply!”
Comply with rules that make you physically and emotionally weaker, rules that keep you distracted from powerful and “dangerous” ambitions such as a sense of self-worth and making things better for the next generation of women in the world.
Please tell me what the difference is between telling women to wear the Hijab and telling them they can’t wear it? Who is oppressing (Muslim) women now?
Wonderful article! Thank you, feministatsea.
“…rules that keep you distracted from powerful and ‘dangerous’ ambitions such as a sense of self-worth…”
So very true! That is EXACTLY what “they” are afraid of. Womyn having a sense of self-worth and maintaining that they alone decide how to clothe their own bodies.
I am glad you approve. You have boosted my confidence a bit. I felt really insecure writing about Islamic culture. Btw I have noticed that you always write Women with a y, instead of an e. Why is that?
I don’t like that I have to include the word “man” or “men” when writing “woman” and “women.” It goes hand in hand with the idea (more of a Christian concept) that a womyn is OF a man. Specifically, in the Christian context, a womyn is made from the man’s rib. To me, that gives the implication (and maybe I’m just sensitive) that a womyn is secondary to a man. I’ve been told that, by thinking this way, I am “reading too much into” something seen as trivial–spelling of words. But I believe language (spelling included) has a lot to do with the stronghold patriarchy has over us.
Ah well I was wondering about that too, but so far I have only encountered that in the English language. And a friend of mine told me there are two ways to look at it. Either the words women and woman are partially constructed from the words men and man or the words men and man are made of parts of the words women and woman.
Which leaves me to wonder about the people who wrote the bible. Perhaps they got it wrong and Adam was made of a part of Eve and not the other way around ;-). In either case in Eden the first human being was a woman, Lilith, but she left after Adam was created, because he and Jehovah tried to subjugate her and she would have none of that.
Have you read the book “Infidel” by Ayaan Hirsi Ali? She is a Muslim woman from Somalia who gained amnesty in Holland and sat on the Dutch parliament. She became a member of the “right-wing” party you’re talking about (I use quotes because right and left in Holland do not line up with American values–the party in question, for example, supports a woman’s right to choose and is actually called the Liberal Party), and it was she who pushed for these changes.
I know, I know…you’re thinking internalized oppression, right? So was I, when I first heard about her. But her book gave me a lot to think about. She explained a lot about how extreme left-wing (and believe you me, I’m pretty far left in general) “tolerance” leads to serious problems (like domestic violence) for women being overlooked or ignored, because, hey, that’s someone’s culture, and who are we as outsiders to question it?
Anyway, I highly recommend picking up “Infidel” and reading it. It’s very informative, whether or not you agree with Ms. Ali in the end.
As far as the word “woman,” if you do a little etymological digging, you discover that it means “female man.” And “female” comes from a word for “fetus,” highlighting our purpose as reproducers of the human race. “Lady” means “loaf-kneader” (no, I’m not kidding), and “girl” means “virgin goddess.” So there’s no way to express our existence in the English language using common words without contextualizing ourselves and labeling ourselves unwittingly with harmful labels and stereotypes.
Yet all of the words for men mean exactly what they are; that is, they carry no dependence on other entities to describe or contextualize them. Etymologically speaking, a man is simply a man.
This, I believe, is why some women choose to alter spellings to form words such as “womyn” and “grrl.” Personally, I feel that the roots of these words are simply too deep to be affected by a change in spelling, and in fact, the change only highlights for me the inherent indignity of a language which lacks a way to express femininity outside of masculine contextualization.
My idea would be to dig through the world’s cultures and languages until we find one whose word for “woman” means only that–an independent entity, valuable in its own right, fully human–and then begin to use that word in place of our piss-poor English options.
I can highly recommend the book The Creation of Patriarchy, by Gerda Lerner. I haven’t finished it myself, but she has done exactly what you describe, digging through the world’s cultures. I can also recommend Man Made Language, by Dale Spender. She has done extensive research on how language was created and how definitions and words were formed and what that means today for our (western) society.
Thank you very much. Both sound fascinating. I’ll be digging through the racks at my favorite used book store later this week for those titles.
The right-wing party I was talking about it a new party in my country. Ayaan Hirsi Ali is not a member and I seriously doubt she would even want to be, they wouldn’t welcome her there either. I haven’t read her book yet. It’s on my list of books to read.
Huh, I didn’t know that. Sorry I jumped to conclusions. I will have to do more research.
Aestas,
Ali is not a Muslim womyn, but she was raised in a Muslim household. This, of course, does not make her representative of Muslim womyn in any way.
The right-wing party is led by Girt Wilders, an extreme Islamophobe who calls for a stop to Muslim immigration among other things, but that alone is very telling of the party’s discriminatory stance. As for the party being pro-choice…I highly doubt Girt Wilders supports hijabis (Muslim womyn who wear the veil, or, hijab)! To him, all things Muslim are oppressive regardless of whether or not choice was involved.
I agree that we should not tolerate domestic violence, FGM, etc. No feminist advocates for that, Islamic or not. But these issues are not Islamic; they are cultural, as you mentioned. Ali, however, deems these oppressive practices inherently Islamic and tied to the Qur’an. This is untrue. I have studied all the verses used to justify the objectification of womyn and have come to find that these do not support the idea of womyn being inferior in any way.
Ali has dubbed the West the safe haven for womyn. Given the fact that we live in a culture of rape and eating disorders (the latter rarely found in the East, the former, unfortunately, is rampant everywhere)…I wouldn’t agree with Ali that the West is free of patriarchy and is obliged to save the poor Muslim womyn from the evils of Islam (sarcasm).
“Personally, I feel that the roots of these words are simply too deep to be affected by a change in spelling, and in fact, the change only highlights for me the inherent indignity of a language which lacks a way to express femininity outside of masculine contextualization.
My idea would be to dig through the world’s cultures and languages until we find one whose word for “woman” means only that–an independent entity, valuable in its own right, fully human–and then begin to use that word in place of our piss-poor English options.”
I whole-heartedly agree with you.
Islamic Feminist,
Thanks very much for giving me your perspective. You’re right that Ali is not Muslim; I’m sorry I misspoke (mistyped?).
I completely agree with you that she is far too optimistic about Western culture when it comes to women’s issues. I took issue with that when reading “Infidel,” but I did find her perspective to be interesting overall, especially because I entered into the reading fairly skeptically, knowing how well she is loved by American conservatives. But I’m really interested in hearing other perspectives, too, so I’m glad you posted back.
I have to admit, I’m terribly wary of organized religion, especially the major world religions which have contributed so much to the oppression of women, not the least of which is Christianity. My knowledge and perspective on Islam, however, is very limited. It’s just not something I’ve had much exposure to.
A while ago, I read an article by Naomi Wolf about the hijab. One woman she spoke to made the very reasonable assertion that wearing the hijab frees her from the social constraints created in the West by our obsession with feminine “beauty.” She also said that it allowed men to relate to her for her mind, rather than her looks. That makes sense, but I couldn’t help thinking that in countries where women are forced to cover their heads, faces, or bodies, I doubt the law was put in place so that men could more easily appreciate women’s minds. It doesn’t make sense: if women’s minds are so respected, then why aren’t they allowed to use them to make their own choices about modesty? And why, if modesty is important, don’t men have to cover, too? It seems inherently oppressive to me, as if a woman is a prized possession which must be carefully guarded from other men, rather than being recognized as an independent human being who belongs only to herself.
In the West, of course, women have a choice, at least in theory (I recognize that for some women, religious or cultural pressure may be a factor). Do you wear the hijab? If so, have you always worn it, or how did you decide to start wearing it? Can you explain more about your feelings on the topic? It’s a complicated matter for me to try to understand, removed as I am from the context. I would really like to learn more.
“Take Barbie for example, a doll that was created for girls to mirror their future adults selves in”
Says who?
More likely it was made to sell dolls and make money?
Not quite. It seemed they had some real problems getting a manufacturer interested at all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbie
Aestas,
Sorry it has taken me this long to respond! I am in my first year of college and am very paranoid about my grades. I hope I hear a response from you, despite my delay.
I LOVE Naomi Wolf! I have had a copy of her book, “The Beauty Myth” for years now, but have yet to read it from cover to cover. I have read the article you’re talking about, however.
I agree that those forced to wear the hijab are oppressed. Anything forced, in my opinion, is oppressive.
“It doesn’t make sense: if women’s minds are so respected, then why aren’t they allowed to use them to make their own choices about modesty? And why, if modesty is important, don’t men have to cover, too?”
Very good point! From the Islamic perspective, it’s for the safety of the womyn in order for her to avoid being harassed. I know it sounds a little suspicious because anything claiming to “protect” womyn needs to be questioned and analyzed. My personal experiences, however, have convinced me. Prior to wearing the hijab, I was sexually harassed, both physically and verbally. Granted, I was in middle school and the boys there were extremely immature, as is expected, but nonetheless, it affected me and how I saw myself. I began to wear the hijab in 8th grade and immediately saw a change in how people treated me, spoke to me, etc. Of course I received more discriminatory remarks, as we do live in a post-9/11 world, but the sexual harassment was no longer experienced.
In Islam, men are obliged to “lower their gaze.” Some grow beards, and it is said to be required based on the Sunnah (tradition of the Prophet Muhammad), but it is not mentioned in the Qur’an. Muslim men are expected to wear long pants and long-sleeved shirts in countries like Iran. However, the fact of the matter is, in the Qur’an, womyn are asked to cover the attractive “ornaments” (wrong translation?) and the man is asked to lower his gaze. That is all in regards to external modesty. It does not say in the Qur’an, specifically, that womyn must cover their hair. Hijab has just been interpreted to mean so. Whether or not that was the intention of the verses that describe external modesty is unknown and it is a contested issue.
Hello, Islamic Feminist:
“it’s for the safety of the womyn in order for her to avoid being harassed”
That’s how I’ve heard of it too (but I’m not Muslim and my family is vaguely Christian), but more recently, through other feminist reading, I’ve started to think that modesty-measures like that are a systemic problem. I know the origins from the Qur’an, but aside from religious motivations the hijab seems to me similar to the other rules Feministatsea mentions, or women having to cover breasts, or even grown women having to shave visible non-head hair. Hijabs, shaving, and shirts etc. can obviously be pretty (though I admit that the niqaab scares me) and there’s nothing wrong with wanting to wear one, or to conform to other standards; the problem is that it becomes dangerous for women to do otherwise, because mostly men will harass and everyone will ostracize. I simplify all of it in my mind as
1) holding the victims rather than the perpetrators responsible for the problem (in fact, the “lower your gaze” thing is a lot more than I can think of other culture-founding rules demand of men, and all of them even say “don’t rape”!), and
2) using fear to constrain women.
I mean to suggest: you say that harassment happens less to hijabis (and I think you mean in the US?), so then a good reason to wear a hijab would be fear of harassment. To me, that boils down to women being restricted by the threat of men. I mean, women could also just stay in the house to prevent harassment, though of course much of it tends to be from men who live with them! But seriously, when we’re afraid of some places or people, we have lost some freedom of movement because of fear.
Gah, sorry for the long comment; I’m partly paraphrasing lots of recent reading. One good place for lots of tales and opinions is Hands up if you’ve experienced street harassment; though it is UK and I am in the US it seems quite similar. Warning: that is long and disheartening and may contain triggers; I’ve only read half of it.
Feministatsea, I’ll try not to comment on too many of your posts at once! Sorry (if you don’t like my comments or want me to stop, please let me know, though of course you could just delete them).
Also, I overused semicolons and colons as usual.
Pingback: Taking advantage of traffic Captain Moron is sending my way | Feminist at Sea