GWU

“When you save someone you imply that you are saving her form something. You are also saving her to something. What violence’s are entailed in this transformation, and what presumptions are being made about their superiority of that to which you are saving her? Projects of saving other women depend on and reinforce a sense of superiority by Westerners, a form of arrogance that deserves to be challenged.” (454)

This piece brings up all the complexities surrounding international feminist movements- how far does history go? Where do you draw lines? How do you come to understand and take issue with a culture that is not your own? Is it possible to do so while still being respectful?

To me, personally, a historical narrative is key when trying to understand and appreciate another culture, it is only though the complex individual history of each nation state that anyone can claim to have made an effort to approach a culture from a lens of scholarship and respect. However, to really understand another’s cultural historical narrative you must first look at your own. Americans, very generally, make all sorts of presumptions about superiority and who needs our help, but in reality this concept is only a product of America’s own history. Abu-Lughod’s discussion of veiling and its cultural significant highlights this. It seems so odd to me that so many Americans (and for that matter Europeans, from what I gained from a visit to France a year or so ago) are so unwilling to accept that they misjudged and misread an aspect of a different culture. Surely, these things happen all time and people should have the opportunity to talk to each other, clear the air and learn each other’s history. Is their simply no one listing? Because I have heard many speak about it. I understand that it is complex to both disagree/ critique a culture while still trying to understand and remain respectful of it at the same time, but in reality it is something that desperately needs to be done.

Going off of this, in the passage I highlighted above Abu-Lughod makes the claim that the idea of saving is more then just liberation etc. but  ‘saving to something’. While I can appreciate where the idea that ones cultural standards are superior comes from and is easy to buy in to, it is at the same time ridiculous.  If you ask most Americans if we have cultural issues, I would expect the answer to be resoundingly yes. Why then would we even want to save women ‘to’ our standards and practices? Sharing ideas and challenges through discourse is one thing, helping when asked and collectively working on challenges is not only appropriate, but something I would hope that leaders globally would engage in more often.

To me I think supporting each other efforts, as Abu-Lughod suggests with RAWA should be a goal for feminists and aid workers everywhere. Gaining historical background, talking though misunderstandings and general support of each other’s initiates, to me would be a big step in the right direction. Clearly there are people and organizations doing this now, but once we can do this on a large scale it seems likely the that idea of ‘saving’ will fade away, or one would hope anyway.

Response by Bekah Eichelberger

Abu-Lughod’s article “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?” highlights American reactions to women in the Muslim world, as well as common misconceptions Americans have about these women. As Abu-Lughod described, Americans see these women as oppressed and in need of liberation, especially in regards to ideas of veiling and expression.

I will be the first to admit that for a long time, I felt that the veil was a form of oppression for women in the Muslim world. Now granted, I was 15 years old and felt that freedom and expression were most effective when by American definitions. I was just learning about feminism and human rights at the time, so I did have a very limited scope of these topics. But I was operating on the ethnocentric view Americans hold about many other cultures, especially about Islam and the cultures of the Middle East. However, in the 5 years between then and now, I have been fortunate enough to learn about Islam as a religion, its role in the Middle East, and women’s position in these countries. However, I am lucky that I have been exposed to these ideas.

I think these ideas stem from a lack of education and understanding of Islamic history, practices, and customs. Islam is barely discussed in classrooms, so many people aren’t exposed to the tenants of the religion. Now I highly doubt Islam will ever be taught correctly or well in most schools, because I can imagine many conservatives responding with shouts of indoctrination and a War on Christianity. I wish I could say I were exaggerating, but many Americans would respond this way(this response would probably not happen if people were educated about Islam. Insert paradox here).

Now this may be a new idea, because I don’t remember any education about Islam and the Muslim world pre-9/11. Those attacks and the “War on Terror” has shaped how the United States views these parts of the world. Granted, it might not have changed much, because World History has often been taught from a white, Eurocentric lens. It will take a great change in American culture for these changes.

However, I think it is possible for Islam and Muslim women to be portrayed correctly within the United States. Although it may take a long time, changing attitudes and more scholarship about Arabic women will pave the way for more understanding about women in the Muslim world.

Regards,
Bekah Eichelberger

“The Rhetoric of Salvation” by Phoebe Peckenham

The rhetoric of Laura Bush’s speech is a point of great contention in Lila Abu-Lughod’s article, “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving.” Abu-Lughod made several interesting points regarding the rhetoric of Bush’s speech, such as how the use of “saving” implies that you are saving these women from something and to something. She argued “projects of saving other women depend on and reinforce a sense of superiority by Westerners, a form of arrogance that deserves to be challenged.” Abu-Lughod also mentioned that there were some organizations that associated the veil that Afghan women wear with oppression and inhibiting access to basic medical needs. One of the organization’s key phrases to garner support was “please join us in helping to lift the veil.” This is a way of thinking that Abu-Lughod challenges—she urges readers to consider that each culture throughout the world is a result of unique historical, social, economic, and political processes. We must “accept the possibility of differences” in the world and acknowledge that “our” needs and goals (feminists, anthropologists, the west, etc.) are not universal. Wearing a veil, of which there are countless types and styles, is not necessarily a sign of oppression, or submission. As Abu-Lughod mentioned, the veil is worn for many reasons from religious to personal to social, and it can be worn to represent agency, modesty, and style. I found this article enlightening because it offered a new perspective through which to address ways in which feminism, religion, and culture are interconnected.

“Who Has The Authority to Struggle?” by Marielle Velander

Who Has The Authority to Struggle?

Feminism has increasingly been accused of being a Western movement that reinforces the racist and classist system that emerged out of European colonialism. In this new era of female agency we need to take into consideration these colonial legacies and look at our own advocacy for women’s rights based on our position within the cultural system we live in, and all the racist misconceptions we inherited by being a part of this system. Leila Abu-Lughod criticizes current feminist movements in her article “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?” by accusing them of “reifying culture”. Through her cynical view of Laura Bush’s Thanksgiving speech, in which Mrs. Bush turns the “War Against Terror” into a feminist struggle to unveil and therefore “liberate” Muslim women in Afghanistan, Abu-Lughod shows how we tend to plaster neat cultural icons over very complex political and historical dynamics. This analysis then leads to a discussion of cultural relativism in the anthropology of gender and causes us to question our own culturally determined definition of agency.

The veil has been highly politicized ever since colonialism took root in the Middle East. This has painted a false image for the West of the veil as being both physically and socially constricting and thus depriving women of agency. Most Western audiences disregard, or are perhaps not even aware of, the fact that not only Muslim women veil, but also people of both genders of many other cultures and religions all over the world veil too. Furthermore, there are countless different types of veiling, even among Muslims. Veiling is the perfect example to see how an important symbol for religious piety was transformed into a neat concept to cover up the much more variable political dynamics at play in the region.

A significant criticism of Laura Bush’s speech is that, even though she claimed that Americans entered Afghanistan to help unveil the women, the women aren’t all tearing off their veils now that the Taliban has lost authority in the country. Their veiling is tied to the much deeper cultural system they live in that has been fostered by numerous invasions by colonial powers. Many women choose to veil now, perhaps, to differentiate themselves from the Western powers that used to occupy them, and to show higher values over their former oppressors by exhibiting modesty and unrelenting faith through the means of their clothing. From this perspective, veiling is its own form of passive agency, completely opposing Laura Bush’s idea that veiling represents a lack of agency.

In seeing veiling as a form of agency rather than as a lack of agency, we need to understand that the freedom of choice is a fundamental aspect of agency. In some societies, perhaps women cannot choose to wear the veil and there the veils do not function as a means for standing up for themselves and their beliefs but rather of being oppressed by authority. However, in many societies, especially among Muslims living in the West who are veiled, women choose to wear the veil for very diverse but equally justified reasons. In class we discussed how the definition of agency as the right to choose is not the definition commonly given in the West, where we tend to equate agency with resistance. Western feminists need to understand that agency can be defined in terms other than resistance to domination, such as through the choice to exhibit our cultural and religious values through our clothing.

The Abu-Lughod article proves very relevant to the current discourse that is taking place right now between the radical FEMEN movement, which has gained worldwide media attention through its topless protests, and veiled Muslim women who led an online campaign criticizing FEMEN’s “International Topless Jihad Day”. The FEMEN event was held in honor of a Tunisian member of the group, Amina Tyler, who had to flee Tunisia after she received death threats for posting a picture of herself topless in protest of gender inequality. The Facebook group “Muslim Women Against FEMEN” was created to protest this event, in which various Muslim women across the world “reclaim their agency” by posting pictures of themselves holding signs about what their veil means to them. This shows how, through the global accessibility of social media, we are starting to fight ethnocentric and Western-dominated definitions of feminist agency and create a worldwide discourse that can fight the imposition of antiquated colonialist misconceptions and create a 21^st century feminism that allows all women to recognize their respective agency in society.

By Marielle Velander

Latest Papers Added

Recently Added Papers:

Who Has The Authority to Struggle? by Marielle Velander ›› ›› ›› ›› Response by Robert  Added on April 11, 2013 “The Rhetoric of Salvation” by Phoebe Peckenham “About Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?” by Bekah Eichelberger GWU Post added on April 11, 2013

Click on any of the links above to read the paper or the responses to it.
If you wish to leave a reply/feedback, first open the page of the paper, scroll down and leave a reply at the bottom of the page.

 

—————————————————–
Other Related Papers:

Is Feminism Relevant to Arab Women? by Farah al-Bakhit ›› ›› ›› ›› Response by Hannah Fried-Tanzer added on March 8, 2013
The Harem by Shorouq Zahra ›› ›› ›› ›› Response by Marielle Velander added on March 29, 2013
Arab Feminism/Colonialism by Dana el-Emam and Doaa Amayreh ›› ›› ›› ›› Response by Marissa Price added on March 12, 2013
Feminism in Islam by Layla Al-kasassbeh ›› ›› ›› ›› Response by Clay Cohen added on March 5, 2013 ›› ›› ›› ›› Response by Bekah Eichelberger added on March 8, 2013 ›› ›› ›› ›› Response by Shorouq Zahra added on March 17, 2013
Arab Feminism by Sawsan Ahmad ›› ›› ›› ›› Response by Phoebe Peckenham added on March 12, 2013