Visiting the Hijab… Again.

Farah

Last month a forum was held at the Adelaide Festival of Ideas focussing on Islam and feminism. Called “Beyond the Veil: Islam and Feminism”, it involved Dr Professor Gary Bouma, a sociology academic at Monash University, Zainah Anwar, founder of Malaysian group Sisters in Islam (SIS) and a founding director of Musawah and Dr Shakira Hussein, an academic at ANU.

So with big expectations about the forum and the issues that would (potentially) be discussed, the title irritates me. Articles with the title beyond/under/underneath/uncovering/taking off/doing something to the hijab/veil/burka and other similar metaphors fixate on items of clothing and taking them off. The moderator mentioned that the word “beyond” was chosen because they wanted a discussion on Islam and feminism which included the hijab in the discussion but wasn’t fixated on it. It’s a valid sentiments but it could’ve been done without the reference to it.

The forum goes over 1 hour long and some interesting points were made (you can download the podcast here). In this post I wanted to focus on a few points made in the debate. For me the most interesting aspect was hearing Zainah Anwar speak. The development of gender politics in South East Asia is a really interesting area and I’ve done some research focusing on the work Sisters in Islam do in Malaysia. Throughout the forum Anwar highlights the challenge she believes Muslim feminists pose by questioning the authority of male-dominated institutions – “who decides this is the verse that determines the relationship between men and women? Who decides which interpretation will be favoured over the other?” The question of ‘authority’ is a significant one. Women’s groups are operating within a traditionally male-dominated environment. Law and social reform by these groups is met with a constant stream of arguments against their struggle in order to silence these dissenting voices within society. The recent experience of SIS highlights this point. They spoke out against the caning of Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarno, but have been accused of being agents for foreign anti-Islamic groups. On this issue I’d add to Anwar that (it’s clichéd but true) history is written by people with authority – people who shape our understanding of past events. For Islam this means that a rich history of women’s leadership and empowerment is denied to women. Like Anwar states, these are tactics used by men to maintain the status quo: to silence and delegitimize dissenting voices in society.

Early in the forum Hussein mentions an important point on discussions of Islam. Women are included in the discussion but are routinely sidelined to discuss only the hijab, whereas men are given the space and power to discuss everything else which affects Muslims. Krista at MMW made a similar point when reviewing a forum organised by ISNA. Another point which Hussein highlights is the obsession with the hijab. The hijab continues to be the focal point of the discussion on Islam and women’s rights especially among non-Muslims (Chesler v Wolf, anyone?) While discussion on Islamic feminism should go further than the hijab, Muslim women respond to those writers because our voices should be included within the debate. But the same issues get repeated again and again and it’s difficult to try and move beyond that discussion because so much of the focus is on the hijab. It’s something I’ve encountered here at Nuseiba – I’ve written a lot of non-hijab posts but there’s an equal amount of posts focussing on the hijab. I think I’ve discussed the hijab more on this blog than anywhere else which is a little odd for me sometimes because I don’t have that much experience with it. In the end, the constant focus on the hijab obscures the real issue: challenging the structures which perpetuate the disempowerment of women.

Another point which was mentioned in the forum and is often overlooked is the diversity among Muslim woman’s dress. For the majority of Muslim women the distinction isn’t as simple as being veiled/unveiled. Hussein discusses her experiences in Pakistan, and their quite similar to mine with the Kashmiris I know. I mentioned above that I don’t have much experience with the hijab and I don’t – in my family and wider community there’s only 3 women who wear the hijab. However, while women don’t wear the hijab, they do veil when the situation requires them to. Most of the women, including my mother, wear shalwar kameez and cover their hair with their dupattas when they need too. Veiling and unveiling is more a continuum of experience rather than a strict dichotomy. There are women who wear hijab and women who don’t, there are some women who fall in between those two positions, some women used to wear the hijab but decided to stop, some don’t wear the hijab but want to, some who don’t at all but wear modest clothes otherwise and not all women who wear hijab do so in the same way. These sound like simple enough points to be making but its a diversity which is often overlooked in debates on women’s dress in Islam. In the end, there are no easy cookie cutter categories to slot in Muslim women. The hijab represents just one aspect of that diversity.

One of the questions asked by the audience at the end of the forum was whether western feminists have a place commenting on Muslim women. It’s an issue that’s come up time and time again, on this blog and elsewhere. Both Anwar and Hussein stressed that in regards to gender politics within Islam Muslim women must lead the way to change. Feminists decrying the Taliban were criticised for taking up that struggle ahead of the women they were ‘liberating’. Afghan women were sidelined in the debate and denied the agency to fight their own struggle. Anwar also mentions an important point which Hussein has also mentioned elsewhere – imposed solutions do not work. You can’t force liberation on people. Anwar cites the example of Amina Lawal where Nigerian women’s groups criticised the action taken by international human rights groups. The Nigerian women wanted to challenge their own legal system. Muslim women need to win the battle domestically so that the change is rooted within social practice and is sustainable over the long term. However, whether this means that western non-Muslim feminists are completely precluded from commenting on issues effecting Muslim women wasn’t ruled out by Anwar or Hussein. My own position is to say leave it alone. But while would be great if non-Muslim feminists stopped talking endlessly about the hijab and burqa and polygamy etc I don’t think they ever will. One commentator on Sahar’s last post said that Sahar wasn’t leaving much room for Western non-Muslim feminists to enter into a conversation about ‘global feminist interests’. Ultimately, maybe that’s the problem – the assumption that they have an interest at stake in the discussion on women’s rights within Islam.

While the forum didn’t completely challenge my ideas on Islam and feminism, the speakers mentioned some very interesting points – things which tend to be overlooked. Overall, the forum is a good introduction to the diversity of opinion in Islam and gender politics.

Princess Hijab

Farah

I was going to write a response to this article by Phyllis Chesler. Her article contains gems of wisdom like “most Muslim girls and women are impoverished and wear rags” and “I am told that the Saudis fly in fresh planeloads of Parisian prostitutes every week.” But I’m getting a little tired of repeating the same arguments over and over. Instead, I want to write about Princess Hijab, the creation of a Parisian guerrilla street artist. Princess Hijab uses the imagery of the niqab to subvert commercial imagery by drawing then onto billboards and posters, and also tags with her ‘Hijab-ad’ prints.

In an interview at Menassat Princess Hijab cites a number of different influences on her work, including “the Woman. No logo from Naomi Klein, The anti-advertising movement… the gender movements… the straight edge, the nerd-centrism, atheism symbolism, urban legends, the allegories and the new myths.” I remember reading No Logo eight years ago; I think it was probably the first (proper) non-fiction book I had read (well, it was either that or Merinissi’s The Veil and the Male Elite – I can’t really remember that far back anymore). I’m not sure if I understood it all back at 15 (so, so long ago) but it was a big wake up. Later at uni I would re-visit and (badly) write about one of the central topics of Klein’s book: what she refers to as “semiotic Robin Hoodism”: culture jamming.

Culture jamming seeks to hijack and politicise the message of mass culture’s main language: advertisements. Adbusters is probably the most well-known organisation (whether or not they continue to uphold their same principles is debatable) and like the stuff Adbusters do Princess Hijab’s art does share a critique of mass culture and consumerism. But, Princess Hijab “does not subvert images in an American way.” Which I can understand – culture jamming I’ve seen is largely ignorant of non-Western experiences. Her approach is unique because she infuses her art with an identity politics; she appropriates an image used by mass culture to symbolise oppression and subjugation and subverts it to challenge dominant constructs of women, Islam and femininity.

In her own words, “Princess Hijab knows that L’Oréal and Dark & Lovely have been killing her little by little. She feels that the veil is no longer that white. She feels contaminated … By day, she wears a white veil, symbol of purity. By night, her black veil is the expression of her vengeful fight for a cause.” She states she isn’t linked to any political ideology or group, but it’s hard to deny the relationship between art, culture and power evident through her work. Through her art she creates sites of resistance both disruptive and creative: sites where opposition can be mounted but also where the viewer can meaningfully engage with the content.

One of the criticisms of her art is that it is too simplistic to offer an alternative to the ideology of mass culture. But I think the criticism is unwarranted –We all use discursive techniques in which we’re fluent; for me its writing. For Princess Hijab it’s taking an image used to symbolize oppression, appropriating it and using it to represent something entirely different – a meaning we have to construct for ourselves. And culture jamming relies on the immediacy of the image and the interaction between viewer and viewed.

Advertising renders nearly anything a brand; it mines culture for its ideas, representations and forms. And in this era of visual marketing, Princess Hijab explores notions of public space and representation, challenging ideological constructs and representations with her distinctive imagery. Her work is an example of how semiotic guerrilla warfare can be used to counter the symbolist imagery adopted by mass culture.

Whether you realise it or not, you are in the midst of a culture war. The key element in the forthcoming struggle will be a battle for domination of key concept areas. It is necessary for us to predict future developments and invest our energies in ‘fringe’ activities where we judge that the issues will become key ones at a later date. Not only issues but the very language is used to formulate the debate must reflect our thinking. If we cannot yet produce our own culture (which we shall strive towards), we should seek to act as a perceptual filter for the mass culture which surrounds us.

Counter Culture helps you win.

Excerpt from An Anthology of Counter Culture edited by Peter Harrington, Tim Bragg and Terry Burgoyne.

A feminist blog?

Sahar

A lot of people describe Nuseiba as a feminist blog because it focuses on Muslim women and attempts to express their voice on multiple issues.  However, I don’t really like the idea of Nuseiba being understood as a feminist blog, because my intentions for it are part of a broader project of Islamic revivalism. So I was pleased to come across the writings and work of Nadia Yassine, who is the founder and head of the woman’s branch of the Moroccan Islamist movement Al Adl Wa Al Ihsanne (Justice and Charity). Yassine highlights her position as a politically active Muslim woman who is  conscious of the  issues plaguing her community, especially that of women. Her vision, expressed in the following quote,  is similar to what I see for Nuseiba.

If you mean by feminism pleading the cause of women, then I am a feminist; but better yet, I’m activist for the restoring of the rights granted to women by Islam. But I am very cautious regarding labels. Mine is not the feminism of Simone de Beauvoir, the Western style feminism. I have my very own Islamic references.

The thing is the West got rid of the idea of God, at least in the public sphere. Its endeavors are purely materialistic. They thus automatically exclude any idea of spirituality or return to God. My struggle, on the other hand, is essentially spiritual, not a struggle between men and women for material entitlements. God has given rights to women in Islam; these inalienable rights are far greater than any rights enjoyed by other women anywhere else at any given time. With that said, the rights of women in Islam have unfortunately eroded over the course of Islamic history. This malaise that has steadily eroded the rights of women in Islam has taken its toll on men too. It is an endeavor to restore the rightful place of women in a society that can never be revived without their real participation.

Beyond The Chador

Sahar

When I began writing my chapter for my thesis on Iran, I was immensely curious  of women’s situation  in  both pre-revolution Iran and post.  Images of chador-wearing women and angry protests on the streets of Tehran are how I visualised the Iranian revolution. Of course I was aware there was  more to it than that.  Though my focus was on the hijab, the hijab debate touched upon various issues affecting Iranian women and allowed me to explore women’s diverse experiences in the past century.  During what was called the ‘modernizing’ period of Iran, Iranian women became a centerpiece for Iranian modernizers (led by the Pahlavis) who saw her as the catalyst for change. Women were encouraged to wear Western dress, remove hijab, and mimic the Western woman. This strategy was employed because modernism had become synonymous with Westernism and Westernism with freedom.  Critics of the revolution have often compared this period to that of the post-revolution, in which they argue the Shah’s efforts to modernise Iran fostered the success of women’s rights and the public participation of women. The revolution, they claim, eroded these achievements. The chador is often deployed as a metaphoric description of the smothering of women’s achievements.  Western media has conveniently depicted the Iranian woman shrouded in a depressing dark chador– the symbol of Iran’s deprivation and women’s subjugation. Anything said in defense of the revolution, is immediately silenced by the ‘sinister’ presence of the chador.

However, after 30 years of the 1979 revolution, recent scholarship on Iranian women has shifted away from what I believe is a flawed dichotomy and looked at how women’s situation has changed dramatically in post-revolution Iran today.

One of such scholars is Janet Afary who will be visiting UCLA to talk about Sexual Politics in Modern Iran. Afary joins the voices of observers like Ziba Mir-Hosseini and Louise Halper who point out that there has been considerable improvement of Iranian women’s experiences since the revolution.

Little is said about the achievements  made by women in Iran.  The criticisms of the revolution are beginning to be unraveled.  Women’s role in the revolution politicized them in ways never seen before. The mass presence of Iranian women in the public streets of Tehran in the late 1970s was a break away from not only the Shah and SAVAK’s despotism and repression, but from the construction of the domesticated traditional Iranian woman.  The women who fought for the success of the revolution could not be told to get back in the kitchen. Ayatollah Khomeini himself was aware of this and encouraged women to join political organizations and encouraged their public participation. What must also be noted is during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq war, while Iran’s millions of men fought against Saddam’s forces, it was Iranian women who ran the country. This added to the importance of women’s historical role in Iran.  It changed the ‘traditional’ view of the Iranian woman who had ‘earned’ the right to have a place in serving Iran in multiple ways that went beyond domestic contributions.  During this period Khomeini stated,

Islam urges women to strive and reach perfection which has no limits, nor does it stop at any point and therefore has granted them the right to serve society as a scholar, inventor, philosopher, teacher, physician, or even an active politician. (quoted by Eniz Sanasarian, 1990)

As pointed out by Afary, the Shah’s policies towards women lacked real benefits for women who did not belong to the elite class.  Life for women in rural and traditional sectors of society did not change dramatically. For instance, literacy rates remained quite low; by 1976 around thirty five percent of women were literate. Further, by the 1970s, the labour force showed only real improvement in the upper classes.   So it was women of the upper classes who identified more with the Western world than the majority of Iranian society who were the receivers of the ‘modernising’ reforms. Considering the impressive efforts to transform Iran, such trends seem low and exclusive, an indication of an unsuccessful program.

As I argued in my thesis, under the ‘Islamic’ government, there has been a more productive focus on gender in ways that the Pahlavi regime had failed to achieve because of its inability to engage with grass root voices.  Since the revolution, there have been interesting improvements in the political, economic and social role of women. In 2004, twenty percent of Iranian labour force was women, which has increased by twenty percent since 1980 and more class inclusive.  The literacy rate in Iran has risen to seventy percent for female adults, compared to under fifty percent in the 1970s. In 2006 reports show well over half of Iranian university students were women. A third of all doctors, 60% of civil servants and 80% of all teachers are women. (see Zahedi, 2007 and Halper, 2005).

Those figures don’t exactly fit in with the negative impression Western media gives us of Iranian women.

Armed with the understanding that comes with higher education, contributing to the economy and a history of being part of the revolution, women have driven a reformist discourse in order to influence the state’s interpretation of Islamic gender roles. For example, Maryam Gorji, a representative in the Islamic Parliament is engaged in writing a woman-centered (re)interpretation of women’s images in the Qur’an. Women like Gorji now seek what they call ‘gender fairness’ in the new state.  The achievements of women like Zahra Rahnavard, who has a Ph.D in political science and became the first women to hold the position of university chancellor in post-revolution Iran demonstrates the kind of success that women are achieving in Iran.

This is not to say there haven’t been disadvantages for women in post-revolution Iran.  However, my point is in line with Afary, who sees the importance in shedding light on some positive effects of the revolution. To suggest that the revolution has brought on nothing but catastrophic consequences for women is misleading and dangerous. Such a simplistic analysis contributes to not only the demonisation of Iran, but reinforces the orientalist stereotypes of Muslim women lacking agency against the brute force of Islam’s supposed misogyny.

In reality, Iranian women from all classes have been politicized. Women’s mass contribution in Iranian society in the past two decades has legitimized their role in the future of Iran.  They have founded their own organizations, study groups; associations and publications. They have marked their own space in politics and contribute to the country in ways that women under the Pahlavi regime could not possibly have done so. This is because the Shah’s policies  openly called for a westernisation of Iran and discredited.

So contrary to how they are perceived in mainstream media and even academic scholarship, Iranian women are far from the silent victims of a religious establishment.

Muslimah of the Week: Fatimah

 

Fatimah was the daughter of the Prophet ( pbuh) and Khadija. There is a lot of controversy around her with Shia and Sunni differing in what she meant for the original community. As a result, it’s been difficult to gather information about her that isn’t riddled with the politics around her. Instead, I’ve briefly focused on her character and why she is an inspiration for Muslim women.

Fatimah was just 5 years old when the family received the news of her father was to be the Prophet of Islam.  As a result, Fatimah witnessed the struggles of her father spreading the word of God early on. There were many occasions where she is said to have come to his defense because the Prophet (pbuh) was harassed and bullied him. At times she would stand in defiance against violent groups who attacked the Prophet (pbuh). According to tradition, on one occasion while Muhammad was performing the Salah (prayer) in the Kaaba, Abu Jahl and his men poured Camel placenta over him. Upon hearing the news, Fatimah rushed to her father and wiped away the filth while scolding the men.  She was slapped across the face but this did not stop her from continuing to defending the Prophet (pbuh).   The incident marked many which symbolized how she did not stand meekly but joined his struggle to defend Islam and the early Muslims.

Fatimah was given the title of az Zahra (The Lady of Light). She was a kind and charitable woman who often gave away all her food to the poor, even if it meant she was left hungry.  She showed great patience during long periods of severe poverty.

She inherited from her father a persuasive eloquence that when she spoke, it was rooted in wisdom and both men and women were moved by what she had to say. 

Fatimah tried to participate as much as she could in the affairs of the growing Muslim community.  Many times she would accompany the Prophet and her husband Ali (Muhammad’s cousin) in battle tending to their wounds and providing food for them.  At the Battle of the Ditch she played an important supportive role by preparing food during what was a long difficult siege.  She also accompanied her father in the campaign to liberate Makkah.

Along with Ali, Fatimah was also called upon by Abu Sufyan to intercede on his behalf with Muhammad while attempting to make amends following the violation of the Treaty of Hudaybiyya.  Abu Sufyan also asked for Fatimah’s protection when she went to Mecca while it was under occupation which she refused under instruction from the Prophet. (pbuh).

What we can take from the life of Fatimah is the strength, courage, intelligence, piety and leadership from a woman who contributed a great deal to the first Muslim community.  The fact that she had a prominent role in treaty discussions, in aiding fellow Muslims in battle and was sought after as a patron for men shows the level of participation and respect she had in the community.

 

 

Muslimah of the Week: Sukayna

Sukayna was the great grand-daughter of the Prophet; the daughter of Hussein. She was influenced by the tragic death of her father and three brothers which inspired her stance against political, social and personal injustice.

Sukayna refused to submit to the custom of face-veiling and maintained the right to meet and speak with men.  The Muslim community at the time was being threatened by outside customs from older civilizations that were detrimental to women in the Muslim community; Sukayna resisted these forces and fought to maintain the public presence of women.

Sukayna associated with powerful and influential members of the community. She passionately debated with the outstanding minds of the time and attended tribal council meetings.

Whatever the political disputes around the death of her father; Sukayna was an example of a woman, which according to historians, was outspoken about the excesses of the dynasty and political authorities.

Sukayna refused offers of marriage from caliphs and princes although ended up marrying five and some even say six times. What she is known particularly for is her use of the right to stipulate conditions in the marriage contract. She specified conditions that guaranteed her right to personal autonomy. She refused to see marriage a way to limit her freedoms. Furthermore, she specifically included the limitation of monogamy and took one husband to court when he attempted to break this condition of the marriage contract in order to take another wife.

Sukayna’s life shows us that strength and activism is not an aberration to Islamic understandings of femininity. She serves as a reminder that women were not meek members of the community, but expressed their disagreement on issues and resisted personal oppression or injustices around them.

Muslimah of the Week: Khadija

This week’s Muslimah of the Week is Khadija bint Khuwaylid.  She was a woman of nobility and great wealth.  Her father was a merchant, and after his death she successfully managed the family business and maintained the family’s fortune.  Being a successful business woman, she used to dispatch goods to Syria. Historians write her caravan was equal to the general caravans of Quraysh. She hired men and paid them on the basis of partnership. She even hired Muhammad (pbuh), who was 25 years old at the time, to work for her even though he had little experience in business.  To her surprise, Muhammad (pbuh) made a hefty profit for her.

Khadija was a widow who was twice married but lost both her husbands to war. Despite her refusal to marry again and the fact that Muhammad( pbuh) was 15 years younger than her, she was so impressed by Muhammad (pbuh) business skills, she asked him to marry her.  Yes, a Muslim woman proposed to a man, and not any man, but a man who soon after was revealed as the Prophet of Islam.  Further, the man was younger than her. In today’s context, the idea of a woman, regardless of her being a Muslim or not, proposing to a man strikes us as strange.  It’s even rarer when the woman is so much older than him. We generally expect men to do the proposing because it fits ideal romantic scenarios but disturbingly implying an insecurity in women who need the tick of approval by a man; not the other way around.

What’s interesting about her was she did not believe in nor worshipped idols, which was the practice of the time. However, she was the first Muslim (After the Prophet (pbuh) of course). During the first revelations, she saw the genuineness of the Prophet’s experience when he thought he was going crazy.

Khadija earned the titles of Ameera-Quraish (Princess of Quraish) and al-Tahira (The Pure One), and Khdija al-Kubra (Khadija The Great). Narrators speak very highly of her character. We are told she used to feed and clothe the poor, and provide for the marriage of those of her kin who lacked the means to marry.

Khadija’s life provides a counter claim to Western and even some Muslim assumptions of Muslim women’s role being limited to the domestic context.

 

 

Muslimah of the Week

Sahar

Muslim women are in need of role models. Many of us look to women from Western backgrounds to seek inspiration from. Islam’s history is riddled with examples of admirable women. We either don’t hear about these women today ’cause Muslims are too busy telling women how to dress appropriately; or they are represented to us in a way that appeals to patriarchal expectations.

Each week, Nuseiba is going to feature a woman from Islam’s history, and hopefully will briefly shed light on her character and contributions to the community she lived in. We feature these women in the hope that Muslim women of today are reassured that women from our history were not just identified as the mother, daughter or the wife of some known man. They made great contributions.  For our non-Muslim readers, it will also help to dispel common misconceptions that Muslim women were, and continue to be, submissive and oppressed.


I begin with Aisha bint Abu Bakr as- Siddiq ibn Abi Quhafa who was the third wife of the Prophet. Much of what we know of Aisha is usually clouded in controversy—either by Shia and Sunni’s squabbling over her status; or by Western criticism of her age during the time she consummated her marriage to the Prophet. I won’t dwell on these issues and rather stress some points that are missed in these debates.

In reference to the Qur’an’s description in 33: 6, Aisha is often known as the ‘Mother of believers’. She was a learned woman who was known for her impressive intelligence and memory which enabled her to record how the Prophet lived. Aisha is one of Islam’s early scholars who explained its history and tradition. She often taught men because she had impressive knowledge of Arabic poetry, genealogy and Islamic ethics. Muslims after Mohammad’s death went to her for guidance and leadership. The Prophet had once said that it is through Aisha we should learn ‘half our religion’.

2210 ahadith are attributed to Aisha, many of which are considered authentic references. This is why some scholars and historians have credited her with establishing up to half of  Sharia law, and why many Muslim jurists hold her in high regard.

Aisha was also a military leader. We often get caught up in the battle of Camel and what it meant for Shia and Sunni but fail to see what else it demonstrated. A woman had mobilized and led an army. We are often impressed and even surprised by females in the army, but this was a woman who was leading an entire army in battle. That’s unthinkable even today!

Thus, Aisha serves as a role model for women’s political, scholarly and legal participation in Muslim communities.