Sectarianism and Privilege

In studying Islam and researching religious tradition, I naturally encounter sectorial differences in the perception of religious figures and in the practice of religious rituals; —while I’ve described my renouncing approach to Islamic sects, in dismissing sectarianism and contemplating its contraints from the position of a religious woman, without disclosing with which sectorial teachings I had been raised, I neglected to check my own privilege from the position of a feminist. I was raised Sunni—Hanafi—the dominant sect; considered Muslim upon this description by the vast majority of Muslims, I am never forced to defend my right to practice my religion as I interpret it should be practiced or my validity as a Muslim (until, you know, they realize I’m a woman and a feminist) and should I find myself in a mosque that is unfamiliar to me, I can safely infer that the prayers will be performed in accordance with my knowledge and convention.

Just as it is perfectly acceptable for me to declare that I don’t identify with a race because I am not white, it is likewise inappropriate for me to entirely dismiss sectarianism because I was raised Sunni. I cannot thoughtlessly toss away the responsibility, as someone in a position of remarkable advantage, to check my biases and the extent of my appropriation. I am not Sunni, and while the assumptions of others that by default I must be are potentially erasing and highly frustrating, they still afford me a great amount of privilege within the Muslim community.

Exploring the depth of the Qur’an and interpreting the nature of existence and laws of morality with the intent of pure truth is convenient without the consequences of societal power dynamics. Shi’a Muslims are killed for their beliefs and stripped of their rights. As a little girl I was raised to die before denying my faith—but that is so easy for a Sunni mother to tell her daughter, who will probably never face so real a threat on basis of her sect. Shi’a Muslims, who are actually brutally killed in alarming multitudes, have most understandably developed other interpretations that grudgingly permit them to deny their faith to save their lives.

So while, as a religious woman, I may expand to encompass identifiably Shi’a beliefs into my own individual religious beliefs, while I may never privately see Islam as Sunni or Shi’a but instead maintain a much more fluid perception of the possibility of Islamic truth, as a feminist I must carefully examine any subconscious prejudices against the widely disparaged spiritual qualities composing Shi’a Islam that would compel me to dismiss certain concepts as ridiculous, and acknowledge the ramifications on a structural level. For example, I believe that Ali was the rightful caliph after the death of the Prophet (concluded from the events that followed the Prophet’s death, not from the fact that Ali was a blood relative—I believe that is irrelevant) and that Abu Hurairah is an untrustworthy source who has misled centuries of Muslims, both of which are more or less Shi’a assessments, but I also have a strong impulse to snidely dismiss other Shi’a concepts (like “temporary marriage”) and in the complexity of interaction and the reality of persecution I have a duty to recognize what I may not understand. This means, basically, that because it is an undervalued and misconstrued position, I am obligated to check everything even more meticulously to watch for my own misconceptions since those misconceptions are reinforced by a majority influence.

Hence this introductory article; it is with this cautiousness (hopefully) that I will be analyzing the Shi’a view of Fatima, the Prophet’s daughter, in the next post. (Or possibly the one after that, depending on how I feel.) As tempting as it is to claim that these beliefs are mine, and that they don’t “belong” to the Shi’a sect or to anyone, that they are free to be everyone’s—as I do with identifiably Sunni beliefs—it would be highly destructive not to recognize that Shi’a Muslims are constantly denied the integrity of credibility, of rights to their religion.

Posted in feminism, interpretation, Islam, Muslims, privilege, social justice | 2 Comments

Celebrate Mercy–Help fight domestic violence, a video by Zeina Shaaban

Zeina Shaaban, a good friend of mine who is extremely dedicated to ending domestic violence and has protested in writing against the proposals of those who would prevent legal protections in Lebanon, has created a magnificent video denouncing domestic violence and marital rape, embedded below.

Contrasted against the stark, brutal reality of abuse, in the video she cites the Prophet (P) as an example of love, kindness, adoration, and tenderness within a marriage, and she demands that the Muslim community follow his example as is their duty in remaining true to Islamic Law.

Zeina has entered the video in a contest hosted by Celebrate Mercy in which she is a finalist, and you can vote for her by “liking” this post on Facebook, which will help in spreading her message.

Posted in feminism, links, Muslims | 4 Comments

Why I Cannot Support the Legalization of Prostitution

Let me first say that I have no judgments about sex workers, that I would only criminalize buying sex (not selling it), that I care very deeply about the women in sex work, that I would pledge my allegiance to their health and safety and happiness, that I fully consider myself both a radical and sex-positive feminist, that I supported—and still support—the Slutwalk, that I would not find insult in another woman calling me a slut or a whore for the purpose of reclamation or otherwise likening my behavior to sex work in defense of prostitution, except that in such a comparison she is dismissing the context of prostitution in a manner that is belittling and erasing for thousands of women in inhumane conditions and thus mistaking nuance for contradiction in her claim of logical consistency*, that I used to share your opinion that legalizing prostitution would protect women in sex work, and finally that I have profound affection for Ozy and immense respect for Clarisse Thorn and for other sex-positive feminists who have been so compassionate, understanding, and accepting.

But after reading several well-researched articles (as well as secretdiaryofadublincallgirl) that thoroughly examine the consequences of initiating such regulations as well as the dire conditions of the enormous number of women involuntarily involved in prostitution (read: raped), I’m forced to conclude that legalizing prostitution is not a practical solution, that legalization does not reduce harm, and that such an action would be equivalent to legalizing patriarchal oppression in that regulations will be constructed and controlled by men, and thus systematic oppression will be reinstated.

Were we to treat prostitution as any other profession (if feminists insist on ignoring context and ramifications) we would still find that in such a state of patriarchy regulation fails us—in wages, in health care, in maternity leave, in sexual harassment and safety, in glass ceilings—when has the ground leveled anywhere else without a fight? And when the occupation in question is prostitution, that fight means meanwhile, women will be raped. And they will be considered legally. raped. I find it entirely unprecedented that a woman would trample over the lives of the underprivileged majority of women who are raped, assaulted, abused, impoverished, and voiceless, by establishing such a system solely to further her career from her own position of privilege.

Legalization and “regulation” would force underground women who don’t meet “qualifications” (some of which will inevitably be absolutely racist/classist/ableist) to sell, with more dangerous “clients” who are also prevented / do not wish to pursue the legal route.

Prostitution and pornography is a haven for the exploitation of detrimental prejudices structured by colonialism and imperialism while reinforcing them (all the more disturbing considering there is allegedly positive correlation between oppressive imagery and climax), and it seeps into society via advertisements, interactions—and, most frightfully, it establishes dehumanizing and objectifying ideas of normalcy. This will not remain regulated within applied constraints.

There are conflicting reports regarding the results of prohibiting the purchase of services but not the selling of them (thus decriminalizing women and instead only criminalizing the men who buy their services)—but the majority of reports I’ve read conclude that this works, and is an alternative to legalizing prostitution. (And unless I want to go out and conduct the studies myself, I will have to side with reports on measurements of quality and prestige.)

When women (of all intersections) receive equal wages for equal work, up to two years of maternity leave, when the costs of tampons and pads and birth control are covered and viewed as basic healthcare, when there’s an equal number of men in sex work as women, when we cease living in a rape culture, I might consider legalizing prostitution for the purposes of regulation. I might believe there is truly harm reduction. Until then it is simply not conceivable. I’ve often complained that radfems are all theory and no practicality, but on this issue the popular position of sex-positive feminism is unrealistic in application.

*Seriously. Asserting that there isn’t a difference between a woman having sex with her husband so that he’d take her to the mall and a woman forced to prostitute herself in the midst of physical and sexual abuse is an infuriating microaggression. Not to mention it reinstates patriarchal gender roles.

Posted in feminism, social justice | 8 Comments

“I’m into/not into [insert race here]” is racist.

Yes, yes, yes.

From The Question of Fetishization, by Natalie Reed (via Lisa Millbank at A Radical TransFeminist)

Clearly, people have all kinds of different idiosyncratic attractions. Red hair, dark hair, blond hair, curly hair, straight hair, particularly large or particularly small breasts, lean body-types, curvier or heavier body types, muscle (in many different proportions), hairiness or smoothness, freckles, beards, blue eyes, green eyes, brown eyes, hazel eyes, ivory skin or ebony skin or any of the positions between, big strong hands, slender fingers, nice smile, tight butt, big butt, and pretty much an infinite number of little quirks a body can have. If it’s a phenotype trait a human being can have, someone somewhere is turned on by it. And that’s completely okay. The last thing I want to do is start arbitrarily policing people’s sexuality.

But where things get problematic is when we get overlaps between the phenotypes and social categories. When it goes from “I think long, dark, straight hair and smaller than average breasts are sexy” to “I’m into Asian girls”, it starts getting murky and difficult and linked to categorism. For one thing, not all women of East Asian descent are going to have that kind of hair or breasts. But perhaps more strikingly, are you attracted to the actual characteristics, or are you attracted to the concept? Where does your attraction to specific kinds of bodies end and where does the way you conceptualize the Exotic Other begin? Is this an innocent sexual attraction that happens to be connected to race, or is it Orientalism expressed through sexuality? And where does the individual fit into this? Are you interested in a given woman because of who she is, or are you interested in her just because she happens to fit into a racial category you’ve fetishized and desire?

If you talk to people with a sexual preference for a specific race, you’ll often notice right away that a considerable amount of that preference is linked to the cultural constructs, conceptions and representations surrounding that race, rather than any grounded particulars. You’ll hear talk of how Asian women are more “feminine” (an often useful but extremely vague and relative term that means nothing when removed from our cultural codes of gender), how black women are more “soulful” or “down-to-earth”, how black men are more “dominant”, “strong”, “laid-back”, and so forth.

Don’t you love it when you read something you’ve always known, but only attempted to half-explain before to people who strongly and incorrectly believe that they are not racist, articulated so perfectly right there in front of you?

Posted in feminism, race | 1 Comment

Gender Wage Gaps by Level of Education (2008); by Gender and Race (1970—2010)

Click each of these to enlarge.

(Institutionalized racism, in case you’re living under a rock and need proof white privilege exists.)

In other fun news concerning the representation of women:

Democratic Women Boycott House Contraception Hearing After Republicans Prevent Women From Testifying

Congressional Birth Control Hearing Involves Exactly Zero People Who Have a Uterus

and Virginia has just legalized rape.

Are you fucking kidding me ?

Looks like it's not only Muslim women who are stuck in the back.

Posted in feminism, privilege, race | 1 Comment

On sexual knowledge

Very briefly, I’d like to address the annoying and incessant reemergence of a peculiar social/unfortunately feminist phenomenon: the defining of sexual pleasure in rigid constraints and the application of these constraints to the criteria of a feminist accordingly.

You may be familiar with it.

Not long after Role/Reboot republished a post I had written months earlier, I was accused. (“J’accuse!”) I had offended a feminist! Because I was not having enough sex, or something:

I’m trying not to let my anger and amazement get the best of me here, but how can any female call herself ‘feminist’ if she does not masturbate, has never really done so and admits to knowing “nothing of the workings of my own body or where anything is”? Every adult female should understand the workings of her body, know where EVERYthing is and know how to give herself an orgasm. Instead of thanking religion, we should be working to free women from the mental and physical enslavement of its prejuduce, ignorance, sexism and cruelty.

*massive eye roll* (Also, did she just refer to me as a “female”?!)

The article in question made it clear that Islam and feminism had rectified my sexual ignorance—the sexual ignorance that patriarchy promotes—not contributed to it. This was made so clear in the piece, in fact, that I can not believe anyone could be this deficient in reading comprehension. What’s more likely is that this woman believes what she wants to believe: that she is the white knight of all ignorant Muslim women everywhere! Her very assessment is structured in colonialism.

I don’t mind Islam being held accountable for my virginity—it’s a reason after all—but I sure as hell mind when it’s held accountable for my sexual ignorance. This infuriates me. My lack of sexual knowledge is a consequence of patriarchy, not of Islam—and in fact, my religion is responsible for my comfort, security, and safety. And yet I’m never released from the exertion of these indictments against Islam, the very religion that had assured me that sexual desires were natural and acceptable, and—even more strongly relevant to me—that so was my mild disinterest.

Additionally, I am highly uncomfortable with the fetishizing way that a Muslim woman’s sexuality is tied to her religion. While there is an additional harmful element of perceived exoticism when we’re talking about Muslim women in particular, I understand that this comes with the disturbing territory of eroticizing women who are allegedly unwilling or unknowing—the “Catholic schoolgirl” fetish. And when the context is Islam and Muslim women, it’s a context of marginalized and politicized experiences distorted and misshapen to sexually satisfy those in a privileged position and to define a woman’s identity based on harmful presumptions and forceful expectations. Fetish is confused with identity, and a woman’s right to her identity and to her expression of that identity is consequently destructively confiscated. This is partly why my initial reaction to Love, Inshallah was extremely cautious and less than thrilled; I was incredibly wary of the potentially detrimental conclusions drawn from this framework of exposure.

In a discussion with a classmate in which I disclosed that I don’t find vibrators the least bit appealing (they are cold and pastic and resemble dismembered body parts), the classmate attempted to convince me that there are all kinds! Well, I’m sure there are, and I would have had no problem with her informing me of this (though I firmly maintain my opinion), if she had not just previously realized I was a virgin and had declared that it was “adorable.” She was presenting this concept of all kinds! of vibrators as if it were new information explained to a child.

Feminism recognizes that women are responsible and powerful, and that a decision to not have sex isn’t “adorable” but an application of freely giving and withholding consent.

In other words, if I hadn’t then known the anatomy of my vagina, I didn’t have to do or know anything this intimate until I was ready and it unraveled naturally. I understand I’m a certain type of woman; I realize that for some women—maybe even for most women—these things don’t simply “unravel naturally.” But I knew myself well enough to recognize that it would for me, and it did. A couple of months ago it simply occurred to me that I recognized where the clitoral hood is located, and relative to that was everything else.

As a friend of mine worded recently, I get off more on fantasy than sensation. I’m sure sensation would help, but it’s not something I require. And for now I’m content with this, and anyone with an urge to revoke my feminist card can go fuck herself. I mean that literally–you go do it, I don’t want to, and that is fine.

What’s alarming is our tendency to trivialize female pleasure by neglecting to recognize the range of full-body sensuality, and reducing pleasure to penetration or physical masturbation by dismissing fantasy and/or the whole of sensuality as “foreplay” or merely a preamble to sex.

Posted in feminism, identity, Muslims, sex, sexuality | 13 Comments

“How do you pronounce your name?”

Näähĭdä (Arabic) ناهدة

(Hispanic and Asian subcontinent)

Nadä (American) [iambic ;)]

Received this question yesterday and thought I’d throw it out. It’s been chaotic here; apologies for the recent brevity–will write soon. *kiss*

Posted in uncategorized | 7 Comments

Mary, Mary

In one of my classes yesterday, we were discussing the Virgin Mary, particularly when she appeared as Virgen de Guadalupe, and I was reminded of how uneasy and erased I feel whenever Mary is defined as a Catholic saint. Of course, in the context of this specific lesson, she was a Catholic saint, and in the context of most of the literature I will ever read, she is a Catholic saint;–and from a non-religious, purely historical perspective, in which religions are perceived as off-shoots of each other rather than independent but reconfirming Revelations, I guess the Catholics did have her first. I am more than happy to tolerate all of these for the purposes of literary and historical accuracy–but even in the absence of heavy context, or in passing casual conversation when the context is either modern or universal, she’s defined as such and her importance in all other religious spheres is ignored.

It makes me wonder how Christians expect me to be outraged on their behalf (and according to them, on my own) when Mary is depicted disrespectfully, if they aren’t willing to acknowledge that I love her as religiously–except when they need my help. No religion but Christianity is today allowed to influence Christmas, or any other aspect of American culture, through the introduction of new dimensions, traditions, or alterations to the original to encompass all those who practice (“Happy Holidays”?! NO WAY). But when they feel attacked, suddenly they turn to me, “But she’s yours too, isn’t she? You’re Muslim! They’re worried about offending you! Let us use your identity to save her!”

How convenient.

Posted in feminism, privilege, religion | 4 Comments

badass.

I’ve seen this picture before, but I recently came across it on Facebook again. So in the name of women who breastfeed being unjustly shunned to the outskirts of society:

problem?

Shove it in people’s faces.

Also, under the last post on the subject, woodturtle linked me to an awesome article with awesome pictures, some of which I have reproduced below. View the original arrangement of pictures and text here. (And read her blog too!)

Breastfeeding while glamorous:

I don’t own any of these images, and each one is credited in the original post.

Posted in feminism | Leave a comment

“What is the best translation of the Qur’an?”

“The best translation of Qur’an is you!” –Imam Suhaib Webb

Let your actions translate the Qur’an.

Posted in Islam | 3 Comments