Nahed Eltantawy responds to Mona Eltahawy’s article on woman-hating in the Middle East. She hates it.
I felt deeply offended and insulted by Mona Eltahawy’s latest article in Foreign Policy, titled Why Do They Hate Us? I follow Eltahawy’s columns quite regularly and I accept many of her arguments, even if I do not agree with her views on Islam and veiling. But for her to claim that “they” hate Arab women is in my view complete nonsense…Everything, from virginity tests, to sexual deprivation, female genital mutilation, sexual harassment and child marriage, is included in this article to produce a column that will surely be welcomed by many Western feminists and anti-Islamists, who for years have been telling us that Muslim women are weak, oppressed victims of misogyny and rigid Islamic rules that force them to hide behind their veils.
Meaning what? We shouldn’t worry about women stoned to death, girls taken out of school and forced into marriage, girls who are held down while their genitals are sliced off, women whipped for not wearing a burqa? We should just say “that’s their culture, it’s none of our business” and go on our way rejoicing? We should be insular and selfish and indifferent?
But for many Arab women (I say many based on the negative reaction Eltahawy’s column has already stirred), this column is offensive and is nothing but a combination of old cultural practices and undemocratic government actions that are described in a way to represent women as the Oriental Other, weak, helpless and submissive, oppressed by Islam and the Muslim male, this ugly, barbaric monster.
So…if it will be welcomed by Western feminists, it’s definitely bad?
Also, pointing out that someone is oppressed means that they are the Other?
“But the grand mufti’s indifference to the well-being and flourishing of girls and women has nothing to do with hatred-”
Sometimes, I think these men don’t even consider women worth hating. Not that dehumanization and hatred are unrealated, but when they discuss women, it sounds more like they are talking about the proper treatment of a cow than a person. I think I would rather be hated.
“Our mothers and grandmothers got married when they were barely 12.”
The Mufti’s mother survived (unfortunately ?) to give birth to him while countless others probably died or suffered immensely from avoidable complications. The Mufti should consider the truncated part of the distribution.
Sorry I forgot: No thinking allowed, Religion ahead.
I fear psocoptera is right: it is not hate that drives these people. They are convinced they are doing good, and are completely indifferent to the pain and suffering they cause.
Oh it certainly is hate some of the time. “Honor” killings; stoning; poisoning girls who go to school and their teachers; that kind of thing.
Mohammed Shafia hated his daughters. He was still raging at them after he’d killed them.
I think it is more anger when your possessions get away. You beat your dog when it gets out of the yard and kills your chickens, you beat your daughters when they don’t listen. It is less hate and more anger at the tool not working the way god intended it. When you break the handle on your hammer, you don’t keep it, you toss it out.
No you don’t. You clip your dog over the ear when it eats your soap, but you don’t beat it. (If it kills your chickens you build a better chicken house.) You don’t beat your daughters when they don’t listen – unless you hate them.
Don’t overthink this. It’s really not nuanced. It really is hatred. There’s widespread delusion that it’s “protectiveness” that goes too far, but it’s not. It’s hatred.
The religion trains men to hate women, and some of them oblige. Certainly not all, but some.
Also, pointing out that someone is oppressed means that they are the Other?
Worse than that, you also Other the poor blokes doing the oppressing.
Nahed Eltantawy:
Only if those “Western feminists and anti-Islamists” fail to read to the end of Mona Eltahawy’s article:
For me, this conclusion was what the article was all about. All of the foregoing horror stories demonstrate what women go through in Islamic/Arabic/autocratic patriarchal countries. The conclusion demands that we recognise the heroism of the examples given and consider how many others are doing similar things without their stories being known.
I can’t imagine the courage and strength of character it takes for women in these societies to stand up and demand their rights. For anyone to read the full article and not agree that anyone with an ounce of conscience should (at the very least) proclaim solidarity with such brave people is unfathomable.
To actually argue it shows Muslim women as “weak” and “victims” is just bizarre!
The whole idea is just insane. By that logic it’s insulting and offensive to protest any violation of human rights at all – so we should just look away and busy ourselves shopping for bigger flat-screen TVs. Mass rape in Congo? Mustn’t say anything; that would be to say the raped women are weak, oppressed victims. Gays being hanged in Iran? Quiet; you mustn’t deny them agency. Bodies piling up in Syria? Stfu, you horrible Orientalist!
Well don’t I feel stupid. Here I’ve been thinking we should be pointing out when people are in bad situations where they’re oppressed, hurt and denied their rights. Wow! Have I got egg on my face…
Quite. I got so annoyed I did a whole new post on the subject.
“Everything, from virginity tests, to sexual deprivation, female genital mutilation, sexual harassment and child marriage, is included in this article…”
What’s her point here? In future, please confine yourself to no more than two examples of abuse against women per article? It’s bizarre. Eltahawy has included these because they all demonstrably happen and because they are all relevant to the point she’s making.
And thanks for the blog Ophelia. Keep fighting that fashionable nonsense. It’s just depressing that such work is necessary.
Why are people looking for a boogeyman that isn’t there? Sure, there probably are instances where westerners have no idea what they’re talking about when trying to confront misogyny in the middle east. Mona’s article is not one of those instances. That Nahed has the gall to try and accuse her article of othering women, it makes me suspicious about whether they even read the article. Sometimes I talk to people, and as soon as misogyny in Islam or Islamic culture is brought up this same tired argument is tossed out, assuming that whatever I have to say is belittling or othering women. It boggles me!!!
“Why do we always focus on violence against women?”
*facepalm* I’m done taking Nahed seriously now.
Ophelia, I can understand how female apologists for islam’s mysogyny upset you, but I wouldn’t go that route.
There’s no shortage of MB hijabs spewing out this dishonest, deceitful bullshit. I’ve been reading the same stuff for years.
I prefer to concentrate on the arguments and ideas being put forward modern, secular muslim women.
We need to play them up, give them a high public profile and as much exposure as possible. Believe me, I have it on good word that promoting such women is by far the best way to get into the faces of people like Nahed.
Everything Nahed believes in is at stake here, whereas with Mona theocratic absolutism is no longer a necessary and indispensable condition for a good nights sleep.
Please don’t make this about me being “upset.”
Mona is a Muslim.
Mona, your critics are full of shit. Keep telling it the way it is.
John Coelho