Issues with FEMEN

FEMEN - Saving Muslim women one bra strap at a time

Muslimah Pride: We Reject Femens Islamophobic and Neo-Colonialist Crusade to Save Us

I have been following the exploits of Femen for a while now and have become increasingly frustrated with the way in which they carry out their campaigns. What Femen are doing is highly counterproductive and detrimental to Muslim women across the world. For me and hundreds of other women who have got in touch with me over the past few days, their tactics are a part of the ideological war that is going on between neo-colonial elements in the West and Islamic societies. Their aim is not to emancipate us from our presumed slavery, but instead reinforce Western imperialism and generate consent for the ongoing wars against Muslim countries. 

Despite my personal views about the effectiveness of Amina Tyler's actions, I hope that she is safe and well. However, I fail to see how declaring 'Topless Jihad Day' in 'support of her' will have any positive effect on her fate. A policy based on "Muslim women, let's get naked" is counterproductive and bordering on insane. This is what prompted me to launch 'Muslimah Pride Day'.

It seemed that many other Muslim women across the world agreed with my stance and what followed was a defiant and vocal rejection of Femen's invitation. Instead of 'getting naked' Muslim women from across the world tweeted and uploaded pictures of themselves to Facebook in their hijabs, niqabs, and western attire. They held up signs telling the world why they were proud of their identities and did not need racist Islamophobic women to dictate to them on how they should dress. The sheer number of participants and support was indicative of the level of anger and frustration that Muslim women feel toward being perpetually infantilised and patronised by Femen and other such groups. 

In our open letter to Femen we referred to them as 'colonial feminists' to describe Femen's activities. I believe it is the most apt term to describe their particular brand of feminism. From Helen of Troy, the face that launched a thousand ships, to the pretext of female liberation surrounding the invasion of Afghanistan, women have always been used as pawns by men as an excuse to wage war. Femen are just the latest chapter in the long history of gender imperialists that manufacture consent and provide ideological foregrounding to justify going to war. By dismissing the role of western countries in the oppression of Muslim women and focusing solely on Muslim men they are only working to demonise Islam, not liberate Muslim women. 

In her latest piece in the Huffington Post UK, Inna Shevchenko suggests that we have "bearded men with knives" behind us that have pushed us to launch this campaign. In doing so she is dismissing our right to self-expression as impossible.

What she is implying is that Muslim women are incapable of speaking for themselves. It is a blatant attempt at denying that we have agency in our own lives. This kind of inferiorising is symbolic of why so many Muslim women are so angry with Femen.

The lead up to the Afghanistan war is a prime example of how feminism is used to construct and disseminate negative stereotypes about Muslim women to whip up support for warmongers. Former First Lady Laura Bush provided the speech act on the so-called plight of the women in Afghanistan, which turned a referent object like the Burkha into an obstacle to freedom. The reported plight of Afghan women was used to manipulate the public in to believing that this war was a well-intentioned feminist crusade to free them. The crude/sick reality that the chosen method of liberation for these women was by bombing, killing and raping them was cynically eclipsed by the fervour to save them from their own 'evil' Muslim men. 

In a climate where we are constantly warned about a 'clash of civilisations' and the West's state of perpetual war with Muslim countries, there is a fundamental need to dehumanise the 'enemy'. The overemphasis on the Muslim man's perceived misogyny overshadows the complete lack of scrutiny of the West's oppression against Muslim women. Femen's reliance on the overused media tropes of the modern western values versus traditional Muslim values is creating a dichotomous representation of the 'self' (West) and 'other' (Muslims). 

Discourses based solely on the way women dress has historically been used to justify oppression against all dominated groups in history. The French colonialists would physically rip the veil of from women's heads during the Algerian Revolution. In his essay Algeria Unveiled, in which he examines the role of women in colonised societies, Frantz Fanon quotes the French colonial authorities in saying: "If we want to destroy the structure of Algerian society, its capacity for resistance, we must first of all conquer the woman; we must go and find them behind the veil where they hide themselves and in the houses where the men keep them out of sight". Neo-cons and Islamophobes use the same approach to keep the Muslim woman subjugated.

The hyper-sexualisation of Femen's campaign and the insistence on Muslim women to strip naked as a gesture of emancipation is a tell-tale symptom of Orientalist fantasies. When puritanical, prudish Christians from Europe first came across the Muslim world, Muslim women were off limits to the western man but that did not stop writers of harem literature fabricating their fantastical sexual encounters and present them as reality. Muslim women were depicted as the sex slaves lounging around in harems, there for the sexual pleasure of Muslim men. This has led to a construction of the 'Muslim Woman' as a submissive sexual object. Femen's tactics suggest that this mentality has not changed. Now that the West has become supposedly sexually liberated, the Muslim woman (the 'Other') represents covered up sex slaves trying desperately to clamber out of their stifling burkhas and forced marriages. 

I am not dismissing the fact that there are problems in the Muslim world. However history has shown that the West has directly (through slavery, colonialism and neocolonialism) and indirectly (through the propping up of misogynistic and oppressive regimes such as Saudi Arabia) done far more damage to Muslim women than Muslim men have. That is why I vehemently oppose Femen's universal imposition of the neocolonial agenda. If Femen really want to help Muslim women they should address the fact that for far too long now, Muslim women have been marginalised, bombed, raped, killed, and enslaved by men from the western world. They should work within their own countries to try and subvert future wars against Muslim countries and help break down barriers. Or perhaps they should stick to trying to liberate women in the west. 

We have been overwhelmed and are extremely appreciative of the messages of support and encouragement we have been getting from non-Muslims around the world. A woman from the US sent us a picture in which she had fashioned a hijaab out of a piece of cloth and headband in solidarity of our right to wear it. Western feminists such as Those Pesky Dames have also come out in support of our campaign. This is indicative of the ability to look past historically ingrained attitudes and the willingness of none Muslims to try and understand this misrepresented religion. 

Despite the popularity of our campaign and the strong message that it sent out, Femen have continued to display a flagrant disregard for our agency and have consistently tried to downplay the legitimacy of our collective voices. Femen have tried to dismiss our campaign using conspiracy and conjecture, and there has been no sign of intellectual debate or a constructive argument against the points that we have raised. They have made no attempt to approach us directly, nor have they provided a response to our open letter. Instead Inna Shevchenko has said that's she will see us on the "battle lines", but we do not wish to engage on those terms.

For us this is not about a spat with Femen. Rather we are concerned with the bigger picture, of changing attitudes and perceptions and to foster a better understanding between Muslims and the West. This is our opportunity to tell our stories, let our voices be heard and take control of our own narratives. Femen should hope for a warm summer, they can get naked every day for all we care, the vast majority of Muslim women have shown that we won't be joining them anytime soon. 

Twitter @_MWAF
Facebook Muslim Women Against Femen 
Follow the #Muslimahpride tag on Twitter

 

Follow Sofia Ahmed on Twitter: www.twitter.com/sofiaahmed1

source 

Why I, As a Muslim Woman, Don't Support FEMEN

The FEMEN movement has been gaining momentum all across the globe, with April 4 being declared the official “International Topless Jihad Day.” In response, however, Muslim women — both, those who wear hijabs and those who do not — launched an online campaign called “Muslimah Pride Day” to show that contrary to what many non-Muslim women are claiming, they aren’t being oppressed by Islam but instead, are offended by FEMEN using them to propel their own Western-liberal agenda. And as a young Muslim woman growing up in the United States, I fully agree with latter group. By making it seem like the hijab is a symbol of oppression, FEMEN isn’t giving the millions of Muslim women around the globe who choose to cover their heads and their body’s freedom. Instead, it is stigmatizing them for making their own choice and their own decision regarding what to wear.

While FEMEN’s intentions are good and admirable — granting the freedom of choice to all women — the way they have gone about it has been completely wrong and misconstrued. In an effort to afford women choice, they’ve made it seem like all women who wear the hijab are oppressed and that simply is not the case. Rather than singling out governments who wrongfully enforce modest dress codes and hijabs as they should have, they have made it seem like this is a global problem and any woman who chooses to cover her head or her body isn’t actually doing it by choice, but is being forced to. Moreover, in many ways, they have ridiculed the millions of women who do wear hijabs and cover their bodies out of choice by making it seem like they’re too naïve to know any better.

I am not too naïve to know any better. But I also don’t wear a hijab. I do, however, cover my arms to my wrists and my legs to my ankles — and yes, I dress this way in the summer too andwhen I go down the shore. I don’t do this because I am oppressed or because my family or my religion forces me too — in fact, wearing full sleeves and pants puts me in the minority in my family. Not everyone follows the same dress code, and they shouldn’t have to unless they feel that they want to. I do it because it is what I feel comfortable in and what I feel most in my element in. Similarly, I have cousins who wear the hijab solely out of their own choice. Their mother’s don’t cover their head, nor does my grandmother. But upon reading the Quran and other religious texts, they made the decision to wear the hijab on their own. And neither my cousins nor I need FEMEN to fuel their savior complex by “liberating” us.

A group of student activists in Birmingham, UK made this abundantly clear as well on Friday,saying that "Femen does not represent a large number of Muslim women although they claim they want to 'free' us from our religion. They argue for liberation and speak for us but do it in the wrong way … For them, the more you strip the more of a feminist you are — that's Western feminist ideology. That's not liberation for us, but that doesn't make us anti-feminist."

"Femen is essentially saying that Western feminism knows best for women all over the world … We see Islam as a form of empowerment and a sense of freedom, so we don't need Femen to speak for us. They have stolen our voice,” she added.

Muslim women also took to Twitter to further voice their opinion — and the message was clear. Femen does not represent us.  

Source

The new Israeli apartheid: Poll reveals widespread Jewish support for policy of discrimination against Arab minority

A new poll has revealed that a majority of Israeli Jews believe that the Jewish State practises "apartheid" against Palestinians, with many openly supporting discriminatory policies against the country's Arab citizens.

A third of respondents believe that Israel's Arab citizens should be denied the vote, while almost half – 47 per cent – would like to see them stripped of their citizenship rights and placed under Palestinian Authority control, according to Israel's liberal Haaretz newspaper, which published the poll's findings yesterday.

About 20 per cent of Israel's nearly eight million people are Israeli Arabs, Palestinians who hold Israeli citizenship and live within the borders of Israel proper. The views echo hardline opinions usually associated with Israel's ultranationalist and ultraorthodox parties, and suggest that racism and discrimination is more entrenched than generally thought.

The poll, conducted by Israel's Dialog polling group, found that 59 per cent out of the 503 people questioned would like to see Jews given preference for public-sector jobs, while half would like to see Jews better treated than Arabs.

Just over 40 per cent would like to see separate housing and classrooms for Jews and Arabs. The findings "reflect the widespread notion that Israel, as a Jewish State, should be a state that favours Jews," wrote Noam Sheizaf, an Israeli journalist and blogger. "They are also the result of the occupation … After almost half a century of dominating another people, it's no surprise that most Israelis don't think Arabs deserve the same rights."

Human rights groups have long decried existing Israeli policies that discriminate against Arabs, citing classroom shortages, smaller municipal budgets, and unequal property ownership rights as proof of Israeli Arabs' status as second-class citizens.

That many Jews believe that Israel has adopted "apartheid" policies is surprising, given that the term is usually deployed only by Israel's most vociferous critics, and suggests that the government-led narrative that the Jewish State is the only democracy in the Middle East is unconvincing to some.

But such self-awareness does not mean that Israelis are ashamed of it. Nearly 70 per cent of those questioned would object to the 2.5 million Palestinians living in the West Bank obtaining the vote if Israel was to annex the Palestinian territory, suggesting that they effectively endorse an apartheid regime. Nearly 75 per cent favour separate roads there for Israelis and Palestinians – although most view such a step as "necessary," rather than "good." Although nearly 40 per cent support annexation, that remains a distant prospect for the moment.

The survey "lays bare an image of Israeli society, and the picture is a very, very sick one", wrote Gideon Levy in Haaretz in a piece to accompany the poll. "Now it is not just critics at home and abroad, but Israelis themselves who are openly, shamelessly, and guiltlessly defining themselves as nationalistic racists.

"If such a survey were released about the attitude to Jews in a European state, Israel would have raised hell. When it comes to us, the rules don't apply."

In the three years since Benjamin Netanyahu's right-wing Likud party took control of the Knesset in an uneasy coalition with religious and ultranationalist parties, rights groups have charted a shift to the right that has accompanied a stalemate in efforts to find a solution to the long-running Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Many now see the two-state solution, even though publicly backed by Mr Netanyahu at the outset of his term, as an increasingly distant prospect, given the expansion of Jewish settlement in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem – territories that along with Gaza the Palestinians want as their future state. That leaves the prospect of a one-state solution, an outcome favoured by some Palestinians, but anathema to Israel as it would threaten the country's Jewish majority.

Many Israelis also fear such an eventuality because it would undermine the Jewish State's democratic values if it were forced to adopt discriminatory policies to retain its Jewish character.

59% want preference in public jobs for Jews over Arabs

49% want the state to treat Jews better than Arabs

33% object to Israeli Arabs having the right to vote

69% object to giving Palestinians the right to vote if Israel annexes the West Bank

74% support separate roads for Jews and Palestinians in the West Bank

42% object to their children going to the same schools as Arabs

Source

Settlement building to ramp up as punishment for UNESCO vote

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the forum of eight senior ministers decided on Tuesday to initiate a new wave of settlement construction in the West Bank. The move is part of a broader set of sanctions against the Palestinian Authority in response to its acceptance as a member of UNESCO Monday.

The announcement was Israel's first real response to the Palestinian application in September for membership in the United Nations.

On Tuesday, the Prime Minister's Office said the construction of 2,000 housing units planned in East Jerusalem, Gush Etzion and Ma'aleh Adumim should be expedited.

"All of the mentioned areas are ones that would remain in Israeli control under any future peace agreement," the PMO said in a statement.

The "forum of eight" also resolved to suspend the transfer to the PA of tax remittances collected by Israel in October. More than NIS 300 million was to have been transferred to the PA before the Id al-Adha holiday, which starts on Sunday evening, to pay the salaries of PA employees.

During Tuesday's meeting Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz and Defense Minister Ehud Barak argues over whether to halt the tax transfers indefinitely. Barak argued that suspending the payments would jeopardize the future of security coordination with the Palestinians in the West Bank, while Steinitz supported the move.

Steinitz said Israel should also cut off its funding to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, as the United States has done. Israel contributes about $2 million a year to UNESCO.

The forum decided to start the process of revoking the VIP status of senior Palestinian officials, which allows them to pass through checkpoints between Israel and the West Bank. The ministers also decided to bar UNESCO missions from Israel and the PA and restrict the agency's activities here.

Nabil Abu Rudeineh, a spokesman for PA President Mahmoud Abbas, said on Tuesday that Israel had decided "to speed up the destruction of the peace process" by accelerating the construction of settlements on land where the Palestinians aim to found an independent state. Abu Rudeineh also described as "inhumane" the decision to suspend tax payments.

After obtaining full membership in UNESCO, the PA will now seek membership in the World Health Organization and 15 smaller UN agencies.

Among the bodies the Palestinians seek to join are the UN's World Intellectual Property Organization, International Telecommunication Union, International Labor Organization and International Atomic Energy Agency. Acceptance to these bodies would be mostly symbolic and have little practical effect for the residents of the West Bank.

The PA was optimistic that France would change its position and support accepting Palestine as a UN member after France voted in favor of accepting Palestine in UNESCO.

source