Feeling Alienated from Feminism
October 26th, 2007La Lubu has a post at Feministe on feeling alienated from feminism, even though she’s a feminist. I commented that the lack of recognition of valid spirituality in much feminist discourse is what alienates me (i.e. buying the secularist argument that religion is inherently problematic / patriarachal).
Since then there have been myriad comments (on the post not necc. my comment), way too many for me to follow and to respond.
But the usual anti-religion memes floated up (precisely what I was complaining about) and some good responses as well (I particularly liked DaisyDeadhead’s here).
The problem (as I see it) with anti-religion discourse in feminist rhetoric, is not that I think people should accept misogyny in religion, nor do I think feminists don’t have the right to criticise misogynyist practices or beliefs. The problem I have is when they see *all* religion as inherently patriarchal, androcentric and misogynistic. That means *my* religious and feminist beliefs are devalued, considered worthless.
The underlying message is that because religion X couldn’t possibly be liberating for women, I must be lying or stupid to affiliate with religion X. Furthermore, the *only* right interpretation of religion X is the one supporting patriarchy and misogyny. Any attempt at a feminist reading of religion X isn’t the *right* interpretation or the *true* interpretation.
It infuriates me that feminists who are non-members of my religion, think they have the right to tell me what I should believe. In my book, that makes them as bad as some patriarchal male mullah!
THAT is why feminism can be very alienating for me, and why imported secular feminism has largely failed in the Muslim world.
Powered by ScribeFire.
A Melburnian Muslim convert blogs religion, academia and life in general.
Loading ...
speak on it!
What about Islamic feminism? There isn’t just ONE type of feminism. At my university, the Women’s Studies department is mostly white and western. We have about 3-4 classes ONLY on women of other races/religions. It SUCKS!
I agree with you though. The whole problem with Western (white) feminism is that it views all women of color/non-Judeo-Christian religions as victims in need of western feminism’s help. It’s funny how Western feminism was supposed to be about giving women a voice, but that same feminism often takes voices away from the women who need them most! That’s why I’m an ISLAMIC feminist!
Here, here! Well said.
“Furthermore, the *only* right interpretation of religion X is the one supporting patriarchy and misogyny.”
I’ve often felt this is the crux of the problem in most (all?) discussions non-Muslims have about Islam. Even with the *best* or *most* noble of intentions (and I can absolutely appreciate this) they will more likely than not a priori denude Islam of all peaceful/feminist/liberating characteristics and then turn around and berate it for being violent/misogynist/oppressive. Any attempt to counter means you are just being naïve/defensive/deceitful. It’s a framework that leaves no room for practicing Muslims to navigate within.
Salam,
I think it’s a bit simplistic to say that “imported secular feminism has largely failed in the Muslim world.” I have just read a quote (in “Women and Media in the Middle East”): “It has been said that Egyptian women started to be accused of importing Western feminism from the moment they severed their ties with the Wafdists who had not kept their promises of partnerhsip with women.” There were/are certainly Western influences in some Muslim feminist movements, but if feminism is seen as “Western” by many Muslims, it’s largely because anti-feminists have used this label to delegitimise them. Muslim feminists were also at the forefront of anti-imperialist movements and most were very far from pro-Western in the political sense.
I also think that more and more women activists in Muslim societies are expressing resistance to the building of barriers between religious and secular based activism. Omaima Abou Bakr (who is working from a religious basis) writes: “In my opinion, it would not serve the general cause of Arab/Muslim/Middle Eastern women to highlight the fact that two such [ie the secular and religious] orientations are ideologically worlds apart and are to work separately in separate spheres. In agreement with the view of Mervat Hatem expressed in a private conversation, I would like to be able to say that Islamic feminists engaged in reforming religious discourses and practices concerning women are doing a greatly needed service to the rest of activists and feminists, complementing their work in development, civil rights, law reforms, reproductive health, circumcision, violence, discrimination, etc”
I describe myself as secular not because I am anti-religious, but because I am working on “secular”, ie, non-religious issues, rather than on religious issues such as Qur’anic exegesis - a very important task but not one for which I have the necessary skills. And the “secular” tasks are important, too.
PS, having read the article by La Lubu, I have to say that I think she’s just hanging around with the wrong feminists! because the feminists I know personally are all working on exactly the issues she identifies as her concerns. Of course, I know that ethno-centric, anti-religious feminism exists and gets most of the media exposure (it take up several chapters of my thesis) - but it’s something I read about rather than experience.
That’s interesting - good to see a couple of the prominent Aussie Muslim ‘feminists’ having a convo on here too eh?
For me, I see this as more a symptom of wider issues - the issue of the place religion has in ‘modern’ society in general. The current discourse - especially regarding Islam - is very cloistered and suffocating outside of academia. Why should anyone feel the need to engage any type of discourse when from the outset it doesn’t respect/value the fact that there are other methodological bases people may base their worldview on?
I don’t know about you guys, but reading the likes of Asma Barlas and even El Fadl shows me that there is plenty of room for issues regarding feminism in Muslim (religious) discourse.
>That’s why I’m an ISLAMIC feminist!
And this is why I’m not:
- it’s a term largely popularised by nonMuslim scholars, and rejected by many of the “Islamic feminists” in question for a range of reasons (although more Muslim women are beginning to adopt it).
- it runs the risk of validating one form of activism by Muslim women over all the others. I am a secular feminist because I work on secular (ie nontheological) issues, not because I am imitiating “Western” models or because I don’t love Islam.
- because of the political climate in many Muslim countries. If one form of feminism is “Islamic”, that implies that the others are “non-Islamic” - only a short step to “unIslamic”, which is a very dangerous label in many parts of the Muslim world. This is not the intention of those working on “Islamic feminism” but it does risk becoming an unintended byproduct.
Muslimah Media Watch wrote:
“What about Islamic feminism? There isn’t just ONE type of feminism.”
This is true and I’ve blogged about it before. For me, what I call Muslim feminism (as opposed to other types of feminism in the Muslim world) is that which a) recognises the inherent falliblity of all interpretations of Islam, because they are the product of fallible human beings b) that is comfortable with pluralism, i.e. that there can be more than one ‘right’ interpretation of Islam depending on a variety of variables and contexts c) seeks an interpretation of Islam that is egalitarian, based on the notion that the underlying spirit of the Qur’anic text promotes egalitarianism as its end result.
Null wrote:
“I’ve often felt this is the crux of the problem in most (all?) discussions non-Muslims have about Islam.”
Definitely! It’s just tragic that feminists (who should know better) buy into the paradigm.
Shakira wrote:
“I think it’s a bit simplistic to say that “imported secular feminism has largely failed in the Muslim world.”
Well, perhaps I should say, failed to win widespread support. Egyptian upperclass women may have benefitted from the type of feminism imported by Huda Sha’rawi etc. but that did not necessarily translate into experiences for lower-class women. Hence the ready appeal of Islamism among women.
“I have just read a quote (in “Women and Media in the Middle East”): “It has been said that Egyptian women started to be accused of importing Western feminism from the moment they severed their ties with the Wafdists who had not kept their promises of partnerhsip with women.” There were/are certainly Western influences in some Muslim feminist movements, but if feminism is seen as “Western” by many Muslims, it’s largely because anti-feminists have used this label to delegitimise them.
I make a distinction between the type of imported Western feminism of women like Huda Sha’rawi, Fatima Mernissi, even Leila Ahmed precisely because it is rooted in secularism and the notion that religion is problematic and has to privatised for the women’s rights agenda to succeed. This is different from the feminism of say, Amina Wadud, Riffat Hassan, Ziba Mir-Hosseini, who are willing (and indeed even see it as necessary) to seek women’s rights in the rejection of patriarchal interpretations of the religion.
“Muslim feminists were also at the forefront of anti-imperialist movements and most were very far from pro-Western in the political sense.”
Who do you mean?
“I also think that more and more women activists in Muslim societies are expressing resistance to the building of barriers between religious and secular based activism.”
For me, I don’t think there is a problem with secular feminism that doesn’t take an anti-religion stance. It’s just rare to find that I think. While Muslim feminists might recognise there are many different spheres of attention (theological, non-theological etc.) and say that working on women’s rights from a non-religious basis (as opposed to anti-religious) is very important. Grassroots feminism in improving access to literacy, education, healthcare, employment etc. is so vital and can be done -and in many cases should - from a non-religious basis.
But mostly in my reading and contact with secular feminisms, the strain of *anti-Islam* is very strong. I don’t think there is a similar recognition from our secular feminist sisters (whether in the Western world, or in the Muslim world) that there can be a Muslim feminism that seeks autonomy and women’s rights *through* religion.
I agree though re: La Lubu running around with the wrong crowd of feminists. Sometimes I think second-wavers don’t think there are any other types of feminism out there.
Dawood said:
“For me, I see this as more a symptom of wider issues - the issue of the place religion has in ‘modern’ society in general.”
For sure.
Shakira:
“I work on secular (ie nontheological) issues, not because I am imitiating “Western” models or because I don’t love Islam.”
Yeah, but you’re a rare breed Shakira!!
Salam,
Several things, in no particular order
I have gone off Riffat Hassan in a very major way since she signed up for the Musharraf cheer squad - a story that nicely illustrates some of the complexities of this topic. Hassan announced that she was returning to Pakistan because Musharraf - vilifier of rape victims - was such a great leader, and she herself is the best person to work for Pakistani women’s rights because she is working from an “Islamic” basis, unlike all those out-of-touch Pakistani secular feminists. Which was highly unseemly, since (as others have pointed out) those “out of touch” Westernised blah blah secular feminists have been living in Pakistan, working with Pakistani women every day, getting arrested and assaulted, while Riffat has been living in the US for decades. To the extent that the “secular” feminists are upper class and in some cases (not all) rather elitist – well, that’s a flaw that Riffat shares.
with regard to Mernissi and Ahmed, their work has changed over time – Mernissi’s in particular, although I’m still critical of elements of it.
With regard to Wadud, I’m interested in some of her work, but funnily enough the reason that I’m critical of much of it is that I don’t think it reflects the priorities of the vast majority of Muslim women – those living in Muslim countries. I find her very Western! (and of cousre she is Western nothing wrong with that, but I think she universalises the Western Muslim experience).
Shaarawi, aristocratic and elitist, yes, but part of a movement that was much more diverse. And she herself is being reconsidered as a more complicated figure than she has been portrayed – for example, Mohja Kahf suggests that she should be seen as a pioneer of the modern hijab rather than the great “unveiler” (and as several writers have pointed out, she did not unveil until towards the end of the era of “unveiling”)
me being a “rare breed” - only in the West. In Muslim societies, while there is plenty of debate and conflict, progressively minded women are rejecting these kinds of barriers (secular/religious) and seeing themselves as engaged in the same task.
I ought to have described myself as a “secular Muslim feminist” - in fact I generally describe myself as just as Muslim feminist, I only include the word “secular” when people say they are not secular – and actually among Western Muslims, I think that many are not conscious of to extent to which they frame their arguments in secular terms.
I have to say that I think the argument over feminist universalism has run its course. Mohanty’s “Under Western Eyes” was written way back in 1983, and its interesting that in her more recent article revisiting the same issues, she is focusing on transnational feminism. I’m not saying that femininist universalism isn’t still out there or that we shouldn’t still respond to it (esp when it links up with US foreign policy). But the main game question for feminists Muslim and otherwise at the moment is – having rejected feminist universalism, how do we build a feminist movement that is not too fragmented to be effective
“Muslim feminists were also at the forefront of anti-imperialist movements and most were very far from pro-Western in the political sense.”
Who do you mean?
Well, Huda Shaarawi for a start, despite her admiration for European culture - she participated in anti-British demos etc. Shaarawi also worked alongside Malak Hifni Naseef, who was far more “anti-Western” - eg was opposed to unveiling because it was being imposed on Egyptian women by outsiders (foreigners and Egyptian men such as Qasim Amin). Despite their differences, the women were close enough for Shaarawi to be the main speaker at the commeration of Naseef’s death.
Tell it.
When I was growing up I used to think feminism was about allowing women to choose their roles for themselves and to challenge unfair stereotypes and to be equal participating members in society but after I became Muslim, I realized that I also had to struggle against the purported only correct set of roles and opinions the feminists had decided were supposed to be universal for all women.