And I, a feminist, have said this along with many others.
Jessica Yee says it best:
We’re not really equal when we’re STILL supposed to uncritically and obediently cheer when white women are praised for winning “women’s rights,” and to painfully forget the Indigenous women and women of colour who were hurt in that same process. We are not equal when in the name of “feminism”, so-called “women’s only” spaces are created and get to police and regulate who is and isn’t a “woman” based on their interpretation of your body parts and gender presentation, not your own. We are not equal when initiatives to achieve gender equity have reverted yet again to “saving” people and making decisions for them, rather than supporting their right to self-determination, whether it’s engaging in sex work, or wearing a niqab. So when feminism itself has become its own form of oppression, what do we have to say about it? Western notions of polite discourse are not the norm for all of us, and just because we’ve got some new and hot language like “intersectionality” to use in our talk, it doesn’t necessarily make things change in our walk (i.e., actually being anti-racist). And I have to say that these uncomfortable processes have been worth the many paths that brought the different contributors of the book together to tell their sometimes uncomfortable truths — not just about feminism, but about themselves and where they are coming from.
But now I’m going to take a stand and say that I’m constantly questioning what feminism even is, and I’m increasingly disturbed every day by the gate-keeping of who and what gets to decide the answer to that question.
So here’s another truth about me: I’m at a point in my activism where in many spaces I no longer feel comfortable just saying that I’m a feminist, full-stop, without adding a few words before or after. I say I’m a multi-racial Indigenous Two-Spirit feminist. I say I’m a hip-hop feminist, a reproductive justice feminist. Like many people, I feel like I’ve been burned out by the mainstream usage and representation of feminism and I’m not making any apologies for what I call myself, because I’m speaking the English language of the colonizer, and if it takes people a few extra words to give me my right to self-determination of what I want to be called in English, so be it.Being uncomfortable with this truth about feminism helps keep my fire alive to change it, and also helps me to not forget where we’ve really come from and where we’re really going.
Like any woman of color, I can’t simply give in to feminism completely. It is a Western ideology that does not mesh well with mine. It has its roots embedded in a history that not only had White men oppressing their own women but their women were equally involved in oppressing my indigenous people – men and women together. I refuse to obediently follow every postulate stated by Western, Eurocentric feminists. Does that make me an incompetent supporter of women’s rights? Does that render me unsuccessful in this march against oppression and malevolent patriarchy? Does that invalidate my opinion on how to bring gender egalitarianism about? Does that make me an adversary in this struggle? Does that make me a bad person? My questioning of agendas and modus operandi should be taken as positive criticism for change.
When a white feminist conducts a conference on gender equality, I want her to introduce me as a Human Being, not an example for her friends and sponsors to examine and exhibit and capitalize on. I want her to ask me what my thoughts are concerning feminism in academia. I want her to understand that there are compartments to my feminist movement; that feminism in my society in the professional realm is far different than feminism in the domestic dimension. I want her to understand that things are not simple. I want her to stop reducing my people to a piece of cloth. I want her to look back and realize that feminists, too, can be very well racist and oppressive. I want her to know that enforcing her idea of success, happiness and liberation on women alienated by her very own culture does not help. I want her to talk to my sisters, cousins, friends, teachers, activists, women from the village, women from the city, women from every corner of my country, my culture, my history before she even thinks of concluding her thoughts on how to define feminism around the world. I want her to open her mind.
I want her to know that the conference she conducted on academic discussions on women’s rights, while poorly-paid migrant workers – my brothers and sisters – are preparing lunch for their lofty thinkers only to get deported the next day, is no good when she can’t acknowledge her own participation in silencing the rights of those around her. I don’t want to be invited to seminars where someone indirectly hints at me wearing my “cultural attire” to show diversity. What am I? A mannequin for the lot?
I want her to know that it is not necessary for anyone to have a post doctoral degree in women’s studies to speak about her own experience and to be regarded by the ones listening and reading. I want her to get rid of her own privilege before she goes on to highlight that of others. I am tired but undefeated of the constant sight of colored students who are expected and sometimes demanded to learn languages, theories, -isms that erase and appropriate but, worse, further colonize their history, heritage, culture and identity.
I want the West to understand that my women and men and I will not adhere to every single idea stated from that corner of the world concerning emancipation and progress. I know the men of my culture have committed extreme acts of brutality against their women but it makes you no good when your ancestry points to lineages and more lineages of colonizers who tortured and enslaved both men and women of my culture.
I am a feminist but consider the ineffectiveness of a title when sub-titles are added for further clarification, explanation and validation. When I speak on public radio or show up on TV, I have to explain my identity: A multi-cultural, anti-racist, Muslim feminist. Sub-titles are created when the primary title fails to encompass other identities, other voices. This is also why I have no issue with women of color creating their own movements like South Asian Women Equality, Womanism, Muslim Gender Equality, Racial and Gender Liberation, so on and so forth.
So stop forcing me to believe you have purged yourself of racism, of cashing in on my experience and history. Stop telling me feminism is “perfect.” Stop telling me you’re here to “help” and “save” me and my sisters. The only person you need to save is yourself before you turn into a subtle instance of yet another colonizer.
THIS. I just read this on Tumblr because people were circulating it like insane. Thank you so much for writing it. Everyone should read this.
extremely well written with the links provided as well. love you for being brave and outspoken about the racism in feminism. sharing this on fb. =)
Excellently written.
Yes, yes, yes!!! Sharing, now.
…oh yes and how a particular generation (but mostly class) of women had to stay behind and provide “slave labour” so our mums could participate in the “revolution”. how does one answer tricky questions like these. It is not always white people telling us about brown women who need saving from brown men. at times some brown women need to have a chat with other brown women.
Word.
I have to say I commend your concern for the women of your country. But I have also to ask one question of you. I, as a man raised in the tradition of my forefathers and holding their values dear to my heart, cannot hold your opinions in lieu of those I have received from them. To us, protecting our women is as sacred an obligation as any other. It is sorrowful to see that among my coevals, there are some that view male heads of household as tyrants rather than protectors.
Forgive me for not being one of your regular audience, but am I correct in seeing you as militantly opposed to patriarchy in all forms? Do you see it as ultimately irredeemable, and if so, why? If the women I love and respect are doomed to a life of grief under my protection, then I shall gladly set them free. But I have a feeling that it is not a question of abolishing patriarchy as much as it is a question of restoring it to its natural function. What are your thoughts on this?
Thanks for commenting, Aamir.
What you’re speaking of is Benevolent Patriarchy in sociological terms. The kind that believes in “protecting” and “safeguarding” women from the “evils” of the world. While I am not against protecting women, I am certainly averse to the idea of inhibiting her mental, emotional and social growth under the guise of being her guardian. In this case, many of our men put more emphasis on protecting than bringing her to the same level they possess. Equality versus Protection in this case. What you could do is, protect her right to be equal. That’s the kind of male-support I endorse and seek.
I see patriarchy as destructive eventually. It is controlled, maintained and upheld by men only. It’s simple: Why can’t we have a society where male and female work together on equal levels without snatching autonomy from the other? Although I am a little confused about this primitive state of patriarchy you’ve mentioned. What exactly are the “natural” functions of a patriarch other than asserting his status as Owner/Protector/Judge of all including a woman’s body, image, self-worth, ad infinitum? Is he the benefactor more than he is the ruler? Let me know.
And today, Mehreen, you have made me a better person.
Haha. I’m not sure about that but if you’ve learned something positive here, I’m glad. :)
Aamir, as a man raised in the tradition of my forefathers, I can empathize with your sentiment; however, feminism isn’t female militancy as you propose, but rather, an ideology that questions the purpose and benefit of static gender norms. As you might come to see, patriarchy and static gender norms have destructive potential for both women and men.
For instance, during the partition of the Subcontinent, men from Muslim, Sikh, and Hindu communities were encouraged to protect the honor of ‘their’ women by either killing them, or by murdering, pillaging, and raping women and men of other communities. This is a prime example of the destructiveness of masculine gender norms, as imposed upon them by their communities (or forefathers, as you see it).
I am a man, and I am also a feminist. Why? Because I reject the masculine gender norms imposed upon me by my forefathers; and accordingly, I also reject the feminine gender norms imposed upon women. No militancy required.
Thank you, Murtaza.
It makes me very happy to know there are men out there from my culture that agree with gender equality and reject gender binary. Your comment made my day.
yes Aamir PLEASE set us free and return to the wild.
Ok ThankYou Shukran ByeBye
Haha. Aneeeeelaw.
the problem is Benevolent Patriarchy comes down to men saving wimmen from other men. Aap leecher pan chorh dein ke ye bachna bachana ka masla hi nahi rahey.
But let me stop here lest this convo goes off on a tangent. I dont want us to hijack this post now.
No, no. You have a point. And a very valid one at that.
Agreed. Loved. Shared.
Tashakor, Hiba jonam!
100 points to EmmKay for dil ki baat. Further 100 points to the most Zeb of Aneelas for making me laugh in an overtly indecent manner.’Patriarchy’ raises my hackles.’Benevolent patriarchy’ makes me feel like some man person has made me wear a Girl Dunce cap and is
smiling condescendingly YET BENEVOLENTLY at me out of the goodness of his heart. What is that? If you mean being a kind, caring father, brother, husband, friend, like many of the men I know are, it comes without the tag of ‘patriarchy’. I’d just call them ‘good people’ who happen to be men.
My men protect me in the tradition of our forefathers, without smothering or restricting us or even considering it something special, but then the women do an equal amount of protecting their men without it needing special mention. Wait! I think it’s called normal familial behaviour. Love and suchlike.
Oh ho, yeh toh shamelessly long comment ho gaya. MK. Shukriya. Feminism is what it means to different wimmins in different situish. Aur badhiya hai.
Mujhe tumhara lambay, zu-maani comments bohut passand hain. Begum.
Men and women are built for different functions. That is not to say it is outside of a man’s compass to bear children, or that of a woman to go to war, but it makes sense if each sticks to the role suited to him/her. Ultimately, societies/families/tribes are themselves transient bonds which individuals share in search of more personal goals.
What I’ve learned in my experience is that fulfillment derives as much from recognizing one’s limitations as from making use of one’s abilities. That I’ve found is the scientific way of doing things, as opposed to insisting on illusory freedoms. The protection I refer to is at first purely physical protection. Then it goes on to include economic protection as well. Women provide men with excellent counsel, and without them the household withers. Discarding that traditional way of life seems to me to be not only unnecessary, but also potentially counter-productive.
Wait. My question is: Who defines these roles? Who gets to dictate which gender does what and where and how? It isn’t even strictly religious when it comes to gender roles. Women swap duty definitions all the time. So do men. Why is it wrong? Why should one stick to one role? Identity is fluid, so are roles. To limit an individual to a set of responsibilities and characteristics is wrong.
That’s it. Defining roles is what we have to do, on a scientific basis, by keeping track of our circumstances and abilities. But to insist on never having to depend on someone else’s cooperation because it desecrates your imagined individuality is setting yourself up for failure. As it is, women are more suited to taking care of the homestead, and men to venturing out into the world. I’m open to revisions of this scheme, based on what is needed, not on what individuals wish were true/cannot bring themselves to accept.
“But to insist on never having to depend on someone else’s cooperation because it desecrates your imagined individuality is setting yourself up for failure.”
Aamir, I see you’ve met Strawman. Don’t eviscerate him, now.
when gender or color or cause are the props for identity, it *requires* that others be treated as others, as objects, even, in order to maintain the identity.
a deeply ironic state of affairs. :-)
Not exactly. That doesn’t happen to white, cis-gendered folks. POC are instantly objectified.
depends what culture one is in at the moment ..
Oh, Aamir, oh — PROTECT me! Oh! Oh! I need your PROTECTION!
Women are no doubt vunerable and to say that she doesn’t need protection is not an honest opinion. When we discuss matters like this we need to go right down to simple terms and descriptions, rather than bringing complex ideas and things that women who are illiterate will not understand or others who just want a simple way out of their miseries. I do find that the western idea of feminism is quite dishonouring to women and not really doing justice with them. It focuses of some aspects which are positive, but it neglects major aspects that exist within the western society such as exploitation of women.
Yes women can work, women can go and do what they want and so on. But when we get statistics about how many single mothers there are in the society or how many women are being torn apart by relations, do we really get the sense of a society crumbling in social morals. While focusing on ‘feminism’ they forget the basic family system and things which include the wider community.
No. No. Maybe. No. Also, no. And no.
lulz.
you love sayin no…i can see that
@Aamir So, they do stuff like that on the planetty you come from, eh?
“That is not to say it is outside of a man’s compass to bear children”
Er, I think it’s outside of a man’s lack of uterus to do so :P
Also, men might have been better suited to war back when height and reach would’ve given an advantage wielding a sword, but it makes no difference to firing a gun.
Technology continues to render traditional gender roles obsolete. Which is why now is a great time to redress them.
A lack of uterus is hardly an insurmountable obstacle. Humans have reached the moon despite lacking wings.
And holding your ground in the thick of battle, with bullets flying in from all directions is not something most women can do. Battle is about more than Spot – Take aim – Shoot.
Hold on. No. You don’t tell me women can’t “hold their ground in the thick of battle” when:
Women warriors did indeed assist their male counterparts in military strategy starting from as early as 3500 BC. Where were you at the time? Link: http://www.lothene.org/others/women.html
Khawla bint al-Azwar had a vagina and she kicked phenomenal ass. In battle. That’s right. Link: http://www.badassoftheweek.com/khawla.html
Anna Yegorova had a vagina and she fought every single assumptive chauvinist along with enemies across the border while working in the Soviet Union’s 805th Ground Attack Regiment. Link: http://www.badassoftheweek.com/yegorova.html
Flora Sandes also resents you for thinking women can’t handle battle. World War 2, son. Link: http://www.badassoftheweek.com/sandes.html
And millions of other women who have had experienced the role of a combatant think you need to brush up on your history lessons, Aamir.
Haseeb summed it up for us. Gender roles are continuously being rendered obsolete. Binaries need to stop.
Allow me to be a bit crass with this comment, but it is likely that these women you refer to had only one thing in common with women in general; female parts. Exceptions don’t prove a rule. They lived in different times and belonged to different tribes and cultures. Just because they could does not mean you can too.
We’re discussing women from medieval times that were considered orthodox and backward. In this age, you or anyone else can never know what I am capable of as a woman. If you’re assuming I can’t “hold my ground” when need be, you are very, very miserably wrong. More assumptions won’t be entertained.
Some guys can’t hold their ground, everythin is based on merit just like Imran Khan was saying, if a woman wants to fight let her. Some armies are having a shortage of people wanting to join it.
While there are exceptions to every rule, it is generally considered that men are usually stronger than women, evidenced by the better performance of male athletes over their female counterparts.
From Wikipedia:
On average, males are physically stronger than females. The difference is due to females, on average, having less total muscle mass than males, and also having lower muscle mass in comparison to total body mass. While individual muscle fibers have similar strength, males have more fibers due to their greater total muscle mass. The greater muscle mass of males is in turn due to a greater capacity for muscular hypertrophy as a result of men’s higher levels of testosterone. Males remain stronger than females, when adjusting for differences in total body mass. This is due to the higher male muscle-mass to body-m
ass ratio.
As a result, gross measures of body strength suggest an average 40-50% difference in upper body strength between the sexes as a result of this difference, and a 20-30% difference in lower body strength. This is supported by another study that found females are about 52-66 percent as strong as males in the upper body, and about 70-80 percent as strong in the lower body.One study of muscle strength in the elbows and knees—in 45 and older males and females—found the strength of females to range from 42 to 63% of male strength.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_humans#Skeleton_and_muscular_system
That’s not to say that women are destined to be weak; other studies have shown that women gain muscle strength just as well as men once they start training.
And since this has moved into women in the millitary, a document from the British Ministry of Defence says:
Differences between women and men in their capacity to develop muscle strength and aerobic fitness are such that
only approximately 1% of women can equal the performance of the average man. In
lifting, carrying and similar tasks performed routinely by the British Army, this means
that, on average, women have a lower work capacity than men and, when exposed to
the same physical workload as men, have to work 50-80% harder to achieve the same
results. This puts them at greater risk of injury. In load marching, another
fundamental military task, and in all other simulated combat tasks, women were found
to perform worse than men, and the greater the load, the greater the discrepancy. The
study concluded that about 0.1% of female applicants and 1 % of trained female
soldiers would reach the required standards to meet the demands of these roles.
http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/10B34976-75F9-47E0-B376-AED4B09FB3B3/0/women_af_summary.pdf
Again, women do fight alongside men in many countries.
Who gets to fight and who does not is not for me to decide, but the facts are plain to see.
HK, as a poor little girl, I can’t understand all those big words.
What’s a ‘complex idea’, my knight in shining armor?
The major traditional gender roles were that a woman is more suited to looking after children and bringing them up. Whereas the man was the earner. Now so far this kind of gender roles has become a bit obsolete in the west and there have been major consequences. Maybe the woman is celebrating that she is working but her kids are at home with a nanny or god knows who, So I find this quite selfish and a mother cannot forget her role just because she found something called ‘feminism’. I don’t find how technology can erase this kind of role, because it is the foundation of every society!
Kids need mothering, not smothering. My mother is a working woman and has raised four kids. And since western societies are hardly on the verge of collapse, I think their women have juggled motherhood/rest of life quite well too.
Also the nucleus family is not the foundation of every society.
@HK.
You’re blaming an entire movement for gender equality and women’s rights on the ineffective, shoddy role played by some single mothers out there who, you and I will never understand why – therefore undeserving to judge them, were unable to be A+ mothers? Classy.
My father takes care of the children at home and is working on his start-up company. Is my mother selfish for ‘working’?
Fusro you sure u arent little red riding hood? By complex ideas what im trying to say is that things are much more simpler than trying to do a Phd in cultural studies or gender equality, to figure out the problems of life!
Pursuing a degree in CS or GE is a choice along with privilege. Do not underestimate its significance even if I do agree that you don’t necessarily need a diploma in either to tackle life. But if people like you continue to stick to “traditional” roles, I hope more women take up these academic pursuits to shun such a thought.
You are again misinterpreting what i am saying. I will give you an example, I’m studying medicine and if i start writing oh the molecular pathology of cancer and this and that gene causes this cancer and so on people will be like why you bringin up such things. It is quite simple You can just say smoking is harmful, it increases risk of cancer. Simple….I am not saying what you are trying to imply.
Who said anything about women not working? The key word you used was ‘juggling’. Many people can’t juggle properly and that is the problem.
I am not blaming an entire movement, but just stating that gender equality doesn’t mean being irresponsible. If i want to be equal in society then that doesn’t mean I should give up the basic role I have in life. So like most of the time we hear feminists saying women should get extra rights, I am also for that, but don’t regard myself a feminist.
You’re mistaking rejection of gender binary for abandoning responsibilities.
well i guess i am, but all these things are interrelated. Because when women and men want to be equal they have to understand their roles. Like someone mentioned technology has changed everything and today women can do things they couldn’t do before, which proves the point that women and men are not identical! I am all for rights for women, which are justified and do not compromise society in general or family life.
Mehreen. You forbid me from making assumptions about you, yet go on to do the same yourself, saying “you are very, very miserably wrong.” My assumption rests on experience, yours does not. Would you like to settle the argument once and for all by actually enlisting and serving in war? My advice would be against doing that.
Aamir, man, are you suggesting women can only get their rights if they enlist? All right then, make your way to the UK, where women do and can fight on the front line.
Or, indeed, to Vietnam, or Afghanistan, or Lesbos, or Sparta, or China, or Japan.
Are you actually a serving member of a military (keyboard warriors need not apply)?
Also, take another look at the history of warfare, both pre-modern and modern. You’ll notice that almost all warriors of stature were men. There have been exceptions to the rule, as you have pointed out, but the rule remains.
Once again, you’ve conceded that gender binary allows that. I don’t know where you’re going with this discussion anymore.
Aamir, I’m a serving member of the military (6 years in a cavalry regiment, if you’re curious) and I can tell you from my personal experience that there’s nothing a woman can’t do anymore: battle-planning, tactics, commanding a squadron of tanks, firing, shooting…just about everything – all in the (cliched) thick of the battle.
Combat aviation is one of the most demanding professions in the world and we already have woman doing quite an admirable job (here in Pakistan).
Thank you, Cav. So much.
Do you even know me to say that? How well do you know about my experience as far as anything is concerned? How many more invalid arguments will you bring in here? If you don’t want to change, don’t. Just try cutting down on the presumptions. They work against your intellect (if there’s any), not mine.
Does…Does HK actually have anything to say?
Is he merely stringing words together in order to sound intelligent? Does he simply have an opinion that cannot stand confinement in his shining, fiery breast, and must let it out?
Who knows the evil bad ideas do? HK does. Gaze upon his face, people. Gaze upon the face of one who has ventured an opinion before the tribunal of the Internet – and survived! Look at his medical credentials – he must know that whereof he speaks. He is a man of impressive technical knowledge, don’tchaknow, about smoking and other nasty things. Yes, things like feminism! Also, have you heard the Good News about technology? Turns out things change! Who knew? Did you know? I had no idea. But herp derp, all this proves is, despite arguing himself into a corner, a man still doesn’t know when to stop talking.
-Fusro yes I do have something to say….
-And no i am not stringing words together in order to sound intelligent. Did i ever write i am intelligent? Just because somebody replies and puts out his opinion doesn’t mean that.
-Can you stop being disrespectful and thinking you are some kind of special being that only you or those you like should be able to reply??
-Look at my medical credential?? It is nothing special to have medical credentials, every year there are millions of new Doctors. So that doesn’t make me anything special or superior, nor have I claimed that.
-Can you show me where is that corner you speak of?
You think you are really funny, i bet yea lots of people will be clapping at your reply, it took a lot of effort digging into every single reply i made and twisting it..well done
“I am tired but undefeated of the constant sight of colored students who are expected and sometimes demanded to learn languages, theories, -isms that erase and appropriate but, worse, further colonize their history, heritage, culture and identity.”
I liked this.
Men and women are different, that is a fact. Different does NOT mean unequal. I do not choose to be a business person or a musician because that is not where I am interest or skilled. However, those fields should not be blocked for me based on anything but a lack of skill or interest. If a woman is not skilled in warfare, then she should not be a warrior… if she is and wishes to be, she should be. Simple enough. In general, men are better designed for warfare. All that testosterone makes them biologically predisposed to that (also to murder, rape and other violent crimes, the vast majority of which are perpetrated by men)
For every “single mother” out there, there is a father who has not taken on the responsibility of raising a child that he had an equal share in creating. How does that make her the immoral one? The only child I know of born without the actions of two humans was Jesus. Those fathers, I am sure would agree with the “my woman” theory of protection too. Many of them are busy proving their manhood by creating as many babies as possible with women they fight to protect (at least while it is convenient for them). Meanwhile, those poor, weak, unprotected women are managing to feed, clothe, educate and love those children without a big, strong man. Women are physically weaker. They are. That is a fact. (And yet, we manage to give birth, one of the most physically traumatic events in a human life.) However, given the fact that we are no longer hunting and gathering, the lines drawn by that physical difference are no longer valid for determining who should work and who should care for children. Children are better off if BOTH parents are parenting. And earning money and then coming home and sitting in front of the TV while the little woman does everything else for you does NOT equal parenting.
I know this is a long comment. Sorry. Just a couple of things that annoy me ;-) Great post by the way… as usual!!
I hope that people do realize that both men and women have testosterone and estrogen in their bodies. The levels vary, but no one has conceded that a certain level of testosterone is adequate for aggressive enough behavior for war. War is not just a game of point and shoot (or stab), it requires intellect, strategy, compassion, humility, and respect. As far as I’m concerned, those values do not depend on any level of a certain type of hormone.
Actually, testosterone IS biologically linked to more aggressive behavior but that is not really the point I was making. My point is that our biological tendencies are based on what was necessary when we were living in very different cultures and social set ups, they are no longer necessarily what needs to determine our roles. Nor is it true that men need to be the ones doing the defining of what is appropriate or not.
Mehreen. I don’t know you personally, but I know enough women to be able to make a safe guess as to where there abilities might or might not lie, in general. I hope that clears up some things.
While sitting on the internet? How accurate.
That is, simply put, the most idiotic statement I have ever read in my entire life. Why don’t you cut down on the idiotic generalizations and start spewing non-wikipedia facts.
Great post. People belonging to nations in Asia, Africa, and Latin America need to stop accepting everything in the West as the ultimate standard and/or the highest progress that can be achieved, because a lot of Western concepts and ideas do not take into account the unique needs and values of our indigenous cultures (by the term “Western” here, I’m not necessarily referring to the geographical West, but “western” as an ideology) Being South Asian, I feel that when we study Western concepts, we need to learn to place them in the context of the culture that gave birth to them, and then interpret them from our own point of view in order to determine their worth for us. As post-colonial nations which are still suffering from the aftermaths of colonization (and are now simultaneously caught in the throes of neocolonialism), this can be difficult, and we are prone to automatically accepting anything Western as a paragon of perfection. We need to ground ourselves in our own reality, and become aware of the special, unique place we occupy in time and space. We need to learn to think for ourselves. If ideas from other cultures show potential, then they need to be adapted to suit our own culture and needs, not adopted blindly. In short, adapt, don’t adopt. Would you agree that it isn’t just the West that needs to open it’s mind, it’s something that we urgently need to do too?
Also, metanarratives and totalizing discourses of any kind are ridiculous and nonsensical. I feel that feminism, as it is defined by the West (and mindlessly defined by many others), falls into this category. A redefinition is in order, and I love the way you’ve attempted that. Kudos!
Just focus on basic human rights. Can a woman (dress code or not) safely venture forth alone outside the home, commute & travel without hindrance, get an education, get a job, start a business, own property, have a say in the choice of her spouse, have equal rights as her spouse over their children, see a physician (male or female), and so on? And in general, do all of these with as much ease as a man?
I think if these basic issues are taken care of, then all the other issues will take care of themselves. In the mean time, all the rhetoric serves merely to obscure the fact that many men (not all!) and some women (more than a few!) oppose some or other of the above. The above rights are turned into an attack on society, religion, tradition, etc., and the reaction is to create new “-isms” – to stand for “feminism”, to abolish the “patriarchy”, to “reform religion”, etc. And it turns into an issue with strong emotions on both sides, and obscures the basic fact that some essential human rights are being denied. After a while, no one is thinking clearly any more.
I don’t know why some have assumed feminism is about competition between women and men or a match to decide who is better equipped to do what. Feminism is really just about freedom for ALL (women & men) from gender norms.
That means….. If a girl wants to be a cop….no problem! If a guy wants to be a nurse….excellent! If a dad wants to put baby to bed…..fantastic!
Feminism is really just about removing expectations from ALL people that are based upon their gender identity. Humans are beautifully varied creatures who are their best when both their intellect and actions are free from restrictions.
It’s just the next step in our evolution, folks! So quit monkeying around, and get with it!
Excellent Points made. About time they start noticing this.
How did this excellent post get turned into a defence for feminism in the comments?
I kind of understand your concerns, Mehreen. I never had a woman’s studies course in my life but I’ve picked up basic texts in the area and am slowly working my way through them…every step of the way, though, I am reminded (or need to remind myself) that this was written for American women and their society and thus may not be applicable so easily to women in our society. And I find myself constantly moulding the feminist ideas I come across to become more malleable and more workable in our context. And I`ve stopped reading blogs written by feminists in first world countries because they just don`t deal enough with the problems we do.
I’ve also developed a degree of categorisation, I find myself constantly differentiating “western” feminism from “eastern” feminism. I feel a bit guilty about this but I guess its fairly accurate. And yes, the condescension esp with regards to the burqa issues and stuff is annoying.
I’d love if you could recommend a few authors from this side of the hemisphere, as I’ve only been able t come across the tip of what must be an iceberg of local (south asian, middle eastern) feminist literature and am hungry for more.
I came on your blog to congratulate you and thank you on expressing these views such eloquently regarding the Maya Khan show. On your blog when I read all those comments about women being “biologically more compatible to live in home”, “women can’t handle war situation”, ….. I reminded of how uphill task we as society are facing,
Keep writing, keep pushing, ice will break.
Mehreen,
I’m an American Caucasian devout Christian, who I admit has never been closer to Pakistan than Italy. But I am enjoying reading your perspectives on things! I definitely think it is healthy to talk to regular people from different cultures rather than just accepting media stereotypes.
I wanted to comment that “Western feminism” doesn’t always represent Western feminists either. I think some of the issues you’re getting at in this post cut deeper than differences in culture or the old colonialist dynamic. When you say, “I want her to know that enforcing her idea of success, happiness and liberation on women alienated by her very own culture does not help”—there is a truth that goes beyond just culture there. When one woman defines for another woman what constitutes “success” in her life, giving her a narrow, rigid set of goals that she must attain, feminism has indeed become another form of oppression for women.
Here’s an example of what I mean: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pamela-haag-phd/feminism-happiness_b_830221.html. Here is a feminist admitting that the happiness of women is unimportant, that they should even be willing to sacrifice their own goals and desires in life in order to advance the “greater good” of making women more POWERFUL (not “happier”). A long time ago I read another article… perhaps by the same author, but I’m not sure because at the moment I can’t find it… decrying the phenomenon in the Western world of women who have attained high levels of education and then turned their backs on the corporate world to be stay-at-home mothers caring for young children. The writer of that piece saw such a choice as a “betrayal” of the feminist movement. She felt that women who sought “traditional” domestic roles instead of pursuing money and power were a threat to the rights and well-being of women everywhere, even when those roles gave them deep joy.
If this sort of radical feminism fills the place of religion in your life, then this attitude is proper. If the power of women over men is your ultimate goal, then it is noble to sacrifice everything else for it. But most of us don’t regard feminism as the end; we see it as the means to an end.
The great irony, of course, is that holding out “power” as the ultimate end, as Ms. Haag does, is actually revealing an unconscious unquestioning acceptance of the fundamental values of patriarchy. Men as a whole tend to value power (along with money, business success, etc.). But if women are truly seeking liberation and the right for self-determination, shouldn’t that include the right to set their own end goals? What if power isn’t what some of us want?
I consider myself a mild sort of feminist. I am unmarried, no boyfriend. I own my own house, drive my own car, earn my own income, take pride in figuring out how to do minor repairs around my home. I go hiking and camping with no company but my dog. I have a masters degree and am upwardly mobile in a professional career. I listen to my parents’ advice respectfully and give it due consideration, but I don’t consider that I owe them “obedience” now that I am an adult. I believe that women should have the opportunity to do pretty much anything they have the physical capability to do in equality with men… and that they should have the CHOICE whether to pursue a career, or a family, or both.
I don’t look down on my sister in any way because she holds a masters degree and currently is a stay-at-home mother with her preschool daughters. Ms. Haag would no doubt consider her a failure and a disgrace. In the light of our faith and personal beliefs, she is fulfilling a holy destiny in this season of her life.
So I believe in the rights of women to set their own goals and seek their own conditions in life… but are there limits on that right? Is there a time when others should intervene in a woman’s life for her own good? To put it bluntly, does Western feminism have a point when it criticizes Islamic culture’s treatment of women even when Islamic women are willing participants in it?
Once again, I don’t think this is necessarily just a cultural issue. Domestic violence is a huge issue of America… most often, though not always, a matter of men physically and/or emotionally abusing and controlling women. This has been shown not only to affect the woman, but any children in the home. Boys who grow up in such a setting are more likely to become abusers as adults. Girls who grow up in such a setting are more likely to marry abusers. And yet, for a multitude of reasons, many women choose to stay in these relationships and resist all efforts to “help” them out of it. Even when her husband breaks her arm or covers her faces with bruises or damages her internal organs with his brutality, she defends him and places the blame on outside interference, or on her own “faults,”… anywhere but on him. In other words, short of physically locking her up away from him, she can’t be helped until she is ready to be helped because the prison is in her own mind.
So when American women (particularly feminists) hear about the conditions of women in Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan under the Taliban—the media-controlled version of it, of course—our instinct may be to “help.” The intention is good, but it may well backfire because we are outsiders and cannot fully understand. Nor do we have the right to define all the mores of your culture. There are some behaviors we can ALL look at and say “That is wrong.” And there are gray areas.
Women like you are perhaps in the best position to see the big picture and to effect needed changes from within your own culture. So… I’m sorry for some of the more obnoxious feminists you’ve encountered from the Western world. Please know we’re not all like that.
Great post and critique! bell hooks and other anti-racist women of color feminists have provided powerful critiques of mainstream feminist discourse and organizations that are dominated by privileged class white women. Much of what you have written here mirrors the issues they’ve addressed as well.
I find it really disturbing when any social justice movement reproduces oppressive hierarchies within their organizing. Standing against sexism, racism, classism, homophobia, imperialism, colonialism, and other forms of oppression should be about recognizing how these struggles are interconnected, not about intruding upon the rights of others. When people fight for their rights, but then participate in another form of oppression, it undermines the struggle entirely.
Thanks for writing this!