To Western Women

So you cover your head and don`t work. Does that make you any better than your Muslim sister who doesn`t wear hijab and chooses to work? This poem is ridiculous. Please find something more interesting to say, something that goes beyond this juvenile and regressive obsession with women`s appearances, ``covered`` or otherwise.

Chowk Editors, surely you have better things to print than this??

Well articulated, yet it is more tragic to see rationalization and fatalism at work in those lines. Sufferring of women is must not be acceptable in any place, shape or form.

What is positive in those lines is the ability to put on a brave face despite everything, the optimism that sees the brighter side of things, and the dignity that goes with being a person who has those qualities. I am reminded of something I read long back: ``Stone Walls Do Not a Prison Make; Nor Iron Bars a Cage``. Amen.

I agree with Beena #1: Doesn`t Chowk have anything better to throw at us. If this goes on, you`re gonna force one of us to write something reasonable :)

Onwards to the poem. So, wearing a low cut dress is part of the ``male agenda``. I see. So Western women wear what men want them to wear. Makes them no different to her Muslim counterpart: Women in Pakistan (for example) are often forced to wear hijab because - and catch this - the sight of women may arouse un-Islamic thoughts in a man. If the hijab isn`t part of the fundo-male agenda, then I guess I`m the Pope.

And on another note: There is nothing licentious (or more vile) than watching a 200lb woman in fish-net stockings. I can assure everone that THAT is not on ANY man`s agenda.

Wear what you want to jazba99, go naked if you want. Just don`t force us to agree with why you are wearing it.

Rafay

Your poem is sad reflections of how people can self-delude regarding you status in society. The poem proves that oppresion of any people can`t take place without their voluntary cooperation. Women tend to be their worst enemies when it comes to fighting for gender equality. You state that in Islamic society men don`t leave their wives. Men can and men do; and worst of it all, unlike women in westren socities who can forge their own destiny by leaving their degenrate husbands, women in Islamic society have no such luxury. They have to suffer indignation without any recourse. And those who do choose leave their husbands risk getting murdered in the name of honor.

This world is based on Darwinian concept; powerfull will survive and the weak won`t. If people hand over the reins of their destinity to someone else, more often than not they will find themselves tied in the stable and relegated to husbandry. And that is exactly what your poem glorifies.

Granted this world is not perfect and we are still strugling for equality. Your poem,however, mocks our efforts and is intended to retard our progress.

But, I can`t really blame you. People in general tend to the products of their environment and view any ideas other than those they are accostomed to with contemt, often accomponied misguided rationalization. But please bear in mind that westren society is a product of long political, social, and philosophical evolution that started in the late 18th century. Before that the social structure in Westren Europe had not changed for centuries. Only after people questioned, revolted and demanded change were we liberated, which was essential for remarkeble scientific, econmic, and philisophical growth that we are experiencing and the third world envies. We not only feed ourselves but also your starving lot. Take Afganistan and Sudan for example, determined to establish an ideal islamic society based on out-dated, mis-interperated priciples. Can`t feed themselves, and are currently going around begging for food. You suffer from an insecurity complex common in moderately educated, first generation middle class South Asians. They never accknowlege that they can learn from others and keep professing that their dirty pesants are the result of western interference. Please have a unbias look around and determine who the giants are and try and stand on their shoulder and not of some local diminutive dwarfs (intellectual and moral)who denounce everything non-ethnic.

Failure of any society of utilize half its intellect is unforgiveable on the local level. Internationally, you can do what ever you want, but please don`t bring your begging bowl while you area lectureing us on our social decay. We can and do address our shortcomeing because we accknowlege them. You on the other hand are blind to yours, continue to ignore our trials and successes, and will further you nation into abject poverty.

Bina

I think your rash assumptions were uncalled for.

Jazba99 is not saying that she is better because she wears the hijab and doesnt work. This poem is attacking the ethnocentrism that Muslim women are subjected to. Yes all is not fine and dandy with the MUSLIM world !!!! Still Hijab can also be a personal choice ...

Nice poem Jazba ... All power to you.

-Yasser Hamdani

Absolute rubbish!!

Jazba :

Covering one`s face or body or revealing the same has nothing to do with emancipation, liberation, equal rights or sexual promiscuity. Though your poem is well-intentioned and I admire your strong faith in the dignity of womanhood, but really what are you trying to say ? Is it that the scantily clothed western women are a lower form of femininedom than the hijab clad women, of say, Iran ? Or that the Western women are demeaning themselves by fighting for their rights ? Sure, there is a lot of sexual harassment at the workplace for women not only in the West but everywhere, but women are fighting to end that nonsense and of-course you know that many powerful bosses including the American President have been dragged in court by women for that kind of stuff.

As far as sexual promiscuity goes, I have had liasions with many burqa-clad, chadar-clad, hijab-covered ladies and all those tend to come off pretty quickly !

Rgds.

Zeemax

jazba,

you wont be a `free` woman in any sense of the word until you stop comparing yourself to others. clothes are secondary.

shandana

Do you have the freedom to choose what you wear ? If not, there is a problem.

Since I`m sitting here doing nothing, here are some random typings from ``Women and Gender in Islam``, by Leila Ahmed, Yale University, ISBN 0-300-00583-8.

In their stinging contempt for the veil and the savagery with which they attack it, these two members of the ruling class [ Turkey`s Ataturk, Iran`s Reza Shah ] reveal their true motivation : they are men of the classes assimilating to European ways and smarting under the humiliation of begin described as uncivilized because ``their`` women are veiled.

That is to say, theirs are the words and acts of men exposed to the Western discourse who have accepted its representation of their culture, the inferiority of its practices, and the meaning of the veil....

...The idea that improving the status of women entails abandoning native customs was the product of a particular historical moment and was constructed by an androcentric colonial establishment committed to male dominance in the service of particular political ends. Its absurdity and essential falseness become particularly apparent (at least from a feminist point of view) when one bears in mind that those who first advocated it believed that Victorian mores and dress, and Victorian Christianity, represented the ideals to which Muslim women should aspire.

...the feminist agenda for Muslim women as set by Europeans -- and first devised by the likes of Cromer [Lord Cromer, anti-suffragist in England and de-veiler in Egypt ]-- was incorrect and irrelevant.

It was incorrect in its broad assumptions that Muslim women needed to abandon native ways and adopt those of the West to improve their status;

obviously, Arab and Muslim women need to reject (just as Western women have been trying to do) the androcentrism and misogyny of whatever culture and tradition they find themselves in,

but that is not at all the same as saying they have to adopt Western culture or reject Arab culture and Islam comprehensively.

The feminist agenda as defined by Europeans was also incorrect in its particularities, including its focus on the veil. Because of this history of struggle around it, the veil is now pregnant with meanings. As item of clothing, however, the veil itself and whether it is worn are about as relevant to substantive matters of women`s rights as the social prescription of one or another item of clothing is to Western women`s struggles over substantive issues.

When items of clothing -- be it bloomers or bras -- have briefly figures as focuses of contention and symbols of feminist struggle in Western societies, it was at least Western feminist women who were responsible for identifying the item in question as signification and defining it as a site of struggle and not, as has sadly been the case with respect to the veil for Muslim women, colonial and patriarchal men, like Cromer and Amin, who declared it important to the feminist struggle.

That so much energy has been expended by Muslim men and then Muslim women to remove the veil and by others to affirm it or restore it is frustrating and ludicrous.

But even worse is the legacy of meanings and struggles over issues of culture and class with which not only the veil but the struggle for women`s rights as a whole has become inscribed as a result of this history and as a result of the cooptation by colonialism of the issue of women and the language of feminism in its attempts to undermine other cultures.

.....

Further, colonialism`s use of feminism to promote the culture of the colonizers and undermine native culture has ever since imparted to feminism in non-Western societies the taint of having served as an instrument of colonial domination, rendering it suspect in Arab eyes and vulnerable to the charge of being an ally of colonial interests. That taint has undoubtedly hindered the feminist struggle within Muslim societies.

...It has meant that an argument for women`s rights is often perceived and represented by the opposing side as an argument about the innate merits of Islam and Arab culture comprehensively. And of course it is neither Islam nor Arab culture comprehensively that is the target of criticism or the objects of advocated reform but those laws and customs to be found in Muslim Arab socieites that express androcentric interests, indifference to women or misogyny.

The issue is simply the humane and just treatment of women, nothing less, and nothing more -- not the intrinsic merits of Islam, Arab culture or the West.

I bet that the Saudis, the Taleban, and the Iranians probably said a couple of nafl raka`at after learning of this poem. Slavery which prides on itself!!! Praise the Lord.

Dear Jazba99,

I`ve got mixed feelings on this topic. I say that because humans as we know are doing the same stuff they did thousands of years ago. One of those things concerns women. Women were treated second class animals thousands of years ago; they`re still treated the same. That`s happening everywhere. Be it the east or the west. The only differences are the tools and reasons utilised to degrade women. So I wouldn`t be too quick to lecture a western women about the whale of a time that our `Bajis` are having in the land of the whatever. However, I feel your poem is really directed towards the `Angrezi` women who think that it`s all bad for the Muslim females, and you are replying to their schools of thought, which sounds justified in my opinion. I don`t quite understand why pretty much everybody replying on this board has targeted the veil thing. There was much more to this poem. Don`t worry Jazba99, if you live in the west you will understand this. We, (including I) are so `zombified` by the media that all you have to do is jot down a key word, and we spring into a frenzy, put words into peoples` mouth, and then try to prove them wrong. It`s a bit like the aliens from Mars. Humans could have only kicked their donkey if they were evil and wrong doers etc.

Hmmm…I`m just reminded of the English born Pakistani girls and Boys who think that Paki girls are dumb and that Paki wives can only make `Roti and Boti`. You know what I mean?

Take care

Omar Phoenix.

ETERNAL TRUTH

This poem has captured the futile persuit of the western women to become `men` in the alleged persuit of equality while the muslim women have accepted their complimentary role to that of men. The muslim women, are following the eternal dictates of the religion and in that process are also defining the domain for men. Women are the keepers of the religious values, as it is said in every religion.

I wish more muslim women speak their mind, especially to the psuedo liberated `baba black sheep` variety found in south asia.

J99:

Let us say half of the over one billion Muslims are women. And no two are alike: they are all different in look and thinking. There is an ever lingering pitfall in any `us versus them` argument. Your protagonist addressing the western women is too general, too evasive, too inconclusive and too bombastic.

To add to Zeemax insights, (---``Covering one`s face or body or revealing the same has nothing to do with emancipation, liberation, equal rights or sexual promiscuity........As far as sexual promiscuity goes, I have had liasions with many burqa-clad, chadar-clad, hijab-covered ladies and all those tend to come off pretty quickly!``-----)

I would say this. Ignore the outward(ly) manifestations. What counts ----- really counts is the matter, some say it is gray, allegedly between the ears. What counts is what you are ---- what you really are. That almost elusive you -----heart, mind, soul and all ----- not the garb!

regards


temporal

to western woman



is a very a beautiful writing from a muslim woman like a rhythemic poem. it is very impresive and detailed analysed writing. I encourage the author and like to write similar issues .

I want to recieve back message from writer

I am MCS student who is finalize mcs in preston university

email

imran_pres@yahoo.com

muhammadimran@nightmail.com

Sigalph

Let me tell you all something ... personally I dont condone anything that is going on in the Islamic World. On a personal level I would probably not marry a Hijaban because I dont like the Hijab myself. However what Jazba is saying is very different and you are attacking her needlessly.

Here at Rutgers I want to quote 2 examples. The first one is that of sister Zaikyaa. She is columbian and her non Muslim name was Nicole Rodriguez. Despite pressures from her family she converted to Islam. She has worn the Hijab and has been extremely modest to the extent of not looking into any ``namahram`s`` eyes and avoiding talking to brothers unnecessarily.... 2 weeks ago she got elected to the Shura at Islamic Society at Rutgers University. When I congratulated her I also objected strongly to the fact that a woman cannot be the President of ISRU. She actually debated with me why that is the right thing? I mean I still dont condone the fact that a woman cannot be the president of the Islamic Society but

what I am trying to say is that without any oppression or any pressure from her family who would want her to convert back to Christianity she

is a Muslim and on top of that she insists on wearing the Hijab zealously. This is her choice and WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO SAY THAT SHE CANT!!

The second example is that of Sister Debbie now Sakina who again is the same. She was a white Caucasian Christian who like all western women detested the Muslim women but is perhaps one of the staunchest proponents of the Hijab.

Again this is her choice and believe me Sigalph ... you are no one to deny her this CHOICE .. nor am I ......

Once again let me tell you that personally I dont even think that Hijab is necessary and IT SHOULD ALWAYS BE A NON ISSUE, or A FASHION STATEMENT!

Sigalph

Let me tell you all something ... personally I dont condone anything that is going on in the Islamic World. On a personal level I would probably not marry a Hijaban because I dont like the Hijab myself. However what Jazba is saying is very different and you are attacking her needlessly.

Here at Rutgers I want to quote 2 examples. The first one is that of sister Zaikyaa. She is columbian and her non Muslim name was Nicole Rodriguez. Despite pressures from her family she converted to Islam. She has worn the Hijab and has been extremely modest to the extent of not looking into any ``namahram`s`` eyes and avoiding talking to brothers unnecessarily.... 2 weeks ago she got elected to the Shura at Islamic Society at Rutgers University. When I congratulated her I also objected strongly to the fact that a woman cannot be the President of ISRU. She actually debated with me why that is the right thing? I mean I still dont condone the fact that a woman cannot be the president of the Islamic Society but

what I am trying to say is that without any oppression or any pressure from her family who would want her to convert back to Christianity she

is a Muslim and on top of that she insists on wearing the Hijab zealously. This is her choice and WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO SAY THAT SHE CANT!!

The second example is that of Sister Debbie now Sakina who again is the same. She was a white Caucasian Christian who like all western women detested the Muslim women but is perhaps one of the staunchest proponents of the Hijab.

Again this is her choice and believe me Sigalph ... you are no one to deny her this CHOICE .. nor am I ......

Once again let me tell you that personally I dont even think that Hijab is necessary and IT SHOULD ALWAYS BE A NON ISSUE, or A FASHION STATEMENT!

-Yasser Hamdani