Monica Butler Feminism and Globalization

Monica Butler 

Feminism and Globalization

4-11-12

This weeks articles were a strong transition from last weeks discussion of the Role of Religion in culture. Some of the issues previously addressed included the political clash that religion sits in the center of and the complex between modernity and maintaining religious tradition. Putting religion into the context of feminism brings to question this idea of reinterpreting religious traditions and looking at religion with a critical eye. However, there is controversy that lies within these simple tasks because they challenge our current ideals and identity associations. As westerners we look at feminism and women’s rights with a privileged eye and we impose our modernity onto many of the Islamic cultures in question. Abu-Lughod discusses this idea in depth, what do Muslim women need saving from? Why do we, as westerners, need to help them? Can’t many of these women choose traditionalism over modernity? When it comes to culture and tradition, who decides what is just?

In “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?” Abu-Lughod addresses a central issue of the “white man’s burden,” and many cases now the “white woman’s burden.” There is multiple accounts of women across the Western worlds advocating for change in the Middle East without understanding a full cultural and religious context. Muslim women are viewed as invisible, covered by their veils, but accounts of Muslim women in outcry are seemingly absent. If we really want to help these women, there are also issues to address than the veil. Many Muslim women want to wear the veil. It is associated with respectability, social standards, and public protection. It is historically imbedded into the culture of many Islamic regions. And when Afghanistan was freed from the Taliban, many women still chose to wear the burqa. This alludes to the fact that many women choose to respect their culture and to wear the burqa as they always have. While a reinterpretation of religious tradition is important, the veil should no longer be the central issue of women’s rights in Muslim countries. The issue arises when the veil is imposed on women, like it was during the reign of the Taliban. 

Abu Lughod addresses this idea of cultural relativism and looking at culture with a critical lens. We take issue with women in Afghanistan for the political position we are in with them in the current war. Much of our focus on these women is a result of propaganda, but what about the women’s rights issues all over Africa, South America, and even in America. While these women in Afghanistan should be liberated of the oppression of the Taliban, can we ever accept that they may prefer a less modern existence than our own. Where do we draw the line between excusing culture and reforming culture? Fatima Gailani made a great point that if she went and asked Afghani women if they would like their country to become a secular nation they would basically say “never.” Islam needs to be challenged and questions need to be asked but the elimination of the religion and the modernization of the society will not be the solution to improving women’s status. What feminism means in the US, is different from that in Afghanistan. Essentially for every society feminism aims to offer equality among men and women. However, the goals of each society depend on their current status and we cannot impose our goals on a society that is not ultimately trying to model themselves after us. 

In the guest post, Jafar addresses many of these challenges when addressing feminism in an Islamic culture from a Western perspective. It goes back to this idea of the Muslim woman as this one dimensional image that seemingly has no way out from a Muslim man’s oppression. Jafar agrees that we must be careful about how we interpret another’s culture, however, asks the question of when is the right time to step in. “When we ignore the plight of people in the name of honoring or respecting a particular culture or tradition, we fail to ask some crucial questions...Exactly whose rights, and which systems of privilege and oppression, are we upholding when we honor the rights of a culture over those of its individuals?” When do we chose to maintain individual rights over cultural rights? While Muslim women do not necessarily need saving from the veil, they may need “saving” when their individual are not upheld. However, what I took away from Jafar’s comments is how can we judge an entire culture until we examine our own cultural flaws with the same importance?

Susan Okin discusses these ideas of individual and cultural rights in her discussion of “Group rights.” The issue with allowing group rights is that it allows a certain group of people toe be exempt from a national law according to their cultural beliefs. In justifying these cultural practices that would otherwise be illegal these government institutions are essentially arguing that culture cannot be changed. As discussed in class, culture and religion are different. While religion may have a set of rules and morals to follow, culture is more or less invented through time. This means that culture is not unchangeable, therefore why are these governmental institutions not promoting cultural adaptation when it comes to the issues under the law? In terms of feminism, Okin discusses how many of these group laws perpetuate oppression against women, polygamy and genital mutilation being a main focus. The issue with these group laws is their aim to maintain male control over women. I thought Okin’s point “While the powerful drive to control women—and to blame and punish them for men's difficulty controlling their own sexual impulses” summed up the motivation behind these group laws. That men are seeking to maintain power over women and punish them for their sexuality deducing them to the sphere of the home and reproduction. Okin points out that the issue with this is that it prevents “women to choose to live independently of men, to be celibate or lesbian, or not to have children.” Not only does polygamy and FGM chose culture over female individual rights but it also harms women physically. These cultural practices come down to one thing, control of women. Therefore, in a society like France where group rights existed how can this be justified? Isn’t contradictory to a society that preaches democracy and equality? If those principles are center to French culture how can they allow these cultural practices to take place?

Lastly, Jafar brings up a new topic with the issues between NGOs in Pakistan and Religious fundamentalism. NGOs work to fight governmental oppression but their approaches and goals are vastly different across Pakistan. Religious fundamentalist see NGOs as a threat to their own goals. They aggressively and often violently NGOs for the threat of female power that lies in their successes. In a male dominated society Religious fundamentalists are essentially acting out in accordance to the threats to their dominance. I believe most relevant are the ways in which the NGOs have sought to approach their issues. Ultimately as Jafar points out the Engaged approach is the most effective. This proactive method seems to be the only way to incite change. The issues with women’s rights lies in the complex between Muslim identities and the selective interpretation of Islam. The women of the NGOs are approaching the issues in effective ways, bring on “priests” to participate and seemingly developing trust between the two parties. By avoiding disruption of social norms the NGOs can act quietly to incite change. Jafar notes at the end of the article the importance of compromise and patience for the NGOs to have success. With any minority group trying to make advances it is important to understand your position and the sacrifices needed to make change. The women will need to compromise and they way not make leaps but they will make strides if they are patient.