Islamic feminism

[MarxSchmarx]

What, if anything, should be the leftist approach to Islamic feminism?

This is mostly tactical, because I realize comrades will probably feel that religion itself should be abolished.

But given that Islam is followed by almost one in five people globally, is this a way to get our foot in the door?

Briefly, Islamic feminism is the view that genders should be substantively equal within the Islamic faith. It uses the Quran and Islamic historiography to abet the claim.

Should we denounce it as a feudal contradiction? Or should we welcome it as a liberatory trend within Islam, something like liberation theology in Christianity or communist zionism within Judaism?

Furthermore, given that Islamic values are often congruent with leftist values on economic questions like interest and charity, in communities where Islam is powerful, should we on the left encourage Islamic feminism? Indeed, in some respects it supersedes western feminism in its broader objectives. So, I am curious what other comrades think of this movement.

[RHIZOMES]

It is contradictory, but ANYTHING that progresses Islam is good. Liberal capitalist democracy is contradictory to the Bible too, but the Christians just ignore those tricky bits in the Bible. The strict adherence to all of the Islamic teachings is holding the Middle East back (And not just from bourgeois development but also revolutionary consciousness as well). We can't take a Robert Spencer approach in which they constantly insult and cut down anyone who claims to be a Muslim progressive and yet at the same time say Islam needs to be reformed. :rolleyes:

[LeninBalls]

Whatever the majority of sane muslims think, just because we don't like a certain religion doesn't mean we can forcibly abolish it.

[h0m0revolutionary]

It is contradictory, but ANYTHING that progresses Islam is good.

Are you serious?

progressing female emancipation from an often patriarchal and overbearing religion like Islam is good. Furthering that faith isn't an aim we should be celebrating however.

[Pogue]

I'd encourage feminism from a perspective more rational than some intepretation of a work of fiction thousands of years old, but obviously I'd support women's struggle for equality and empowerment.

[TC]

It just goes to show that the liberal impulses towards universality and cultural relativism are such that, so long as you have someone who wants to self identify as 'islamic' and/or 'feminist', you can define anything you like as 'islamic' or 'feminist.'

I think words, even those describing religions and philosophical/ideological positions, have real meanings that cannot simply be appropriated by any speaker who wants to associate themselves with them. To this extent, there is no such thing as "islamic feminism" in that islamic belief and feminist belief are mutually exclusive unless distorted beyond the sensible meanings of the terms.

[Devrim]

"What, if anything, should be the leftist approach to Christian feminism"

How would people react if everything pertaining to the West was called Christian.

Of course there are many feminist organisations in 'Muslim' countries that would not describe themselves as Islamic. Why on earth should we be interested in some religious theological view of feminism.

Devrim

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Islam is incompatible with women's liberation. The Koran is quite clear (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/women/long.html) on this matter.


But given that Islam is followed by almost one in five people globally, is this a way to get our foot in the door?


This strikes me as cynically manipulating, as well as insulting and patronising - as if it's impossible to argue the case for people's freedom without appealing to their religion. It can be done in the "west", but why not the Islamic world?

[Dimentio]

Well, if islamic feminism is introduced, I guess either "islamic" or "feminism" will have to go from it.

[jake williams]

I think you folks are not being tactical enough about this. Feminist/gender/sexual politics in Islamic countries are complex, difficult, and diverse. There are some relatively secularized, progressive parts of the Muslim world where there is a strong secular feminist politics. Iran comes to mind (not that it's a secular country per se, but it's got a well-developed semi-secular left), the Gulf states, sections of the Levant. There are also some places, and some segments of Islamic society, where that's completely impractical right now, and where there are real, immediate issues for women that need to be dealt with by any means necessary, even if doing so requires implicating a sloppy reading of Islam in support of a hardly perfect version of gender equality which is nonetheless considerably progressive in the local context. As far as I can tell there are basically two types of "Islamic feminist" - people who aren't really Muslims, and people who aren't really "feminists". Both can still, however, be progressive. A major component of all this that has to be considered is that to have real, serious, radical change, there has to be political space for women to discuss things, and in a lot of places that isn't here yet, and an "Islamic" casting of the issue might be the best way to get there.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

There are also some places, and some segments of Islamic society, where that's completely impractical right now, and where there are real, immediate issues for women that need to be dealt with by any means necessary, even if doing so requires implicating a sloppy reading of Islam in support of a hardly perfect version of gender equality which is nonetheless considerably progressive in the local context.

As I pointed out in my last post, any such "religious progressive" movement is built on quicksand theologically speaking. That weakness is a weapon in the hands of those opposed to women's liberation.

You are trading long-term gains for short-term convenience, which is not only lazy, but deceptive and counterproductive also.

[Revy]

Are you serious?

progressing female emancipation from an often patriarchal and overbearing religion like Islam is good. Furthering that faith isn't an aim we should be celebrating however.

I think he might have meant it as Islam becoming more progressive, not progressing Islam's influence.

But I agree with your post.

[jake williams]

As I pointed out in my last post, any such "religious progressive" movement is built on quicksand theologically speaking. That weakness is a weapon in the hands of those opposed to women's liberation.

You are trading long-term gains for short-term convenience, which is not only lazy, but deceptive and counterproductive also.
I think you're underestimating the pragmatics of it, and I also think you're ignoring analogous examples. Much of Western progess, insofar as there's been any of it, has been based on shaky Christian theology. Would you similarly dismiss the successes of liberation theology?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I think you're underestimating the pragmatics of it, and I also think you're ignoring analogous examples. Much of Western progess, insofar as there's been any of it, has been based on shaky Christian theology.

By and large, Western progress was achieved in spite of Christian theology. Slavery is not condemned in the Bible, and we have the Enlightenment to thank for borgeouis democracy and all that followed, including Marxism.


Would you similarly dismiss the successes of liberation theology?What successes? Liberation theology is simply another tool of the Catholic Church, albeit one that has fallen out of favour in recent times.

[Rascolnikova]

I am reminded of a recent conversation with friends about "Mormon feminism."

Our conclusion? The three qualities, {intelligence and coherency}, {Mormon-ness}, and {feminism}, are related such that, for all assignments of x, y, and z,

xy/z=1


:D


That said, I think we should encourage Islamic feminism--and Mormon feminism--as much as possible. Exposure to new ideas can only help; satisfaction is the intolerable luxury.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I think you're underestimating the pragmatics of it, and I also think you're ignoring analogous examples. Much of Western progess, insofar as there's been any of it, has been based on shaky Christian theology.

By and large, Western progress was achieved in spite of Christian theology. Slavery is not condemned in the Bible, and we have the Enlightenment to thank for borgeouis democracy and all that followed, including Marxism.


Would you similarly dismiss the successes of liberation theology?What successes? Liberation theology is simply another tool of the Catholic Church, albeit one that has fallen out of favour in recent times.

[black magick hustla]

there are probably some feminist orgs in muslim countries with muslim adherents, but it seems to me this people are just "feminists" who happen to be muslim - not necessarily a synthesis of islam and feminism. it seems to me that the overtly theological feminism is a western gimmick.

[jake williams]

Well naturally Islamic theology isn't going to be contributing much to feminist theory, I wouldn't expect. Here's my point. If we can get from a place where women aren't allowed to participate in public discourse to a place where they are, that's a help to feminism. And if it takes a bit of silliness to get there, that's okay. While I'm very sympathetic to a sort of feminist puritanism (if I might use the term), there are some very immediate, very real problems, which at this point I don't have a lot of idea what to do about. There is not going to be any sort of radical feminist revolution in the Muslim world that overthrows God State and Patriarch. I'd love to see it happen, but you have to actually get there, and right now in the real world Islam is a major part of the society.

[h0m0revolutionary]

Well naturally Islamic theology isn't going to be contributing much to feminist theory, I wouldn't expect. Here's my point. If we can get from a place where women aren't allowed to participate in public discourse to a place where they are, that's a help to feminism. And if it takes a bit of silliness to get there, that's okay. While I'm very sympathetic to a sort of feminist puritanism (if I might use the term), there are some very immediate, very real problems, which at this point I don't have a lot of idea what to do about. There is not going to be any sort of radical feminist revolution in the Muslim world that overthrows God State and Patriarch. I'd love to see it happen, but you have to actually get there, and right now in the real world Islam is a major part of the society.


I agree, but we don't condone it, we express appreciation for what it attempts to do (seeking equality between Islamic females and Males) but we show the inadequacy of this.

Seeking equality with males marks gender as the most important factor in female oppression when we know ths to be false, a working class female has much more in common then she does with a female boss, their oppression isn't even comparable. So when islamic-females seek equality with men, they are really just seeking to be 'equally exploited'.

Take Iran as a good case study here, in Iran there is currently the 'One Million Women' campaign wich is attempting to gain some degree of womens rights, now of course this is applaudable. But has such severe limitations that we must evaluate if it has any worth at all to female emancipation.

When islamic-feminism dosn't call for sisterhood with working class women the world over, dosn't work otuside of the framework of an islamic republic (as in Iran) and dosn't appreciate that the veterbrate of feminism must be class, we have every right to be dismissive.

[jake williams]

When islamic-feminism dosn't call for sisterhood with working class women the world over, dosn't work otuside of the framework of an islamic republic (as in Iran) and dosn't appreciate that the veterbrate of feminism must be class, we have every right to be dismissive.
There's a big difference between disagreeing and being dismissive. Frankly I think in a lot of places in the Islamic world, the situation is so dire that we shouldn't dismiss much. Challenging everything, and a sense of permanent discomfort with half-measures and reforms is part of the radical perspective. But at the same time, especially considering none of us except for Devrim are actually living in the Islamic world, we need to try to pull as much progressive movement out of "Islamic feminism" as we can get, especially since that's all there is in a lot of places, and even doing that can be hard, dangerous work.

One more comment about liberation theology - much of the upswing in Latin America is a consequence of the successes, and perhaps more importantly failures, of liberation theology. I think we're seeing, longterm, a general secularization of the mass movements, which I think is in reaction to the failures of liberation theology. At the same time, it's hard to see that they would be so strong if there wasn't that base in the first place.

[Patchd]

Does anyone here actually know what Islamic feminism entails? I don't and would be appreciative if anyone could point me to something explaining what it means, although I doubt my position on it would differ. I oppose religion in all forms.

[h0m0revolutionary]

Does anyone here actually know what Islamic feminism entails? I don't and would be appreciative if anyone could point me to something explaining what it means, although I doubt my position on it would differ. I oppose religion in all forms.

What it says on the tin haha. It's a liberal notion that men and women are equal and that islam validates this claim.

Of course we don't need the Quaran, Ayatollahs or Imams to validate feminism. But whatever..

[Hoxhaist]

we shouldnt get sidetracked into proselytizing Islamic feminism because it seems to only really exst in the west and we need to enter the Islamic grassroots in Africa, Middle East, and Asia

[Hoxhaist]

I also feel that if we pursued Islamic feminism then we would quickly become the useful idiots for Islamists rather than the other way around

[jake williams]

we shouldnt get sidetracked into proselytizing Islamic feminism because it seems to only really exst in the west
That's just not true. There are very important and very brave women's movements in Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, Iraq, Egypt, Palestine, and I'm sure a number of others. A lot of them have "Islamic feminist" tinges. Just because you don't know about it doesn't mean it's not happening.


I also feel that if we pursued Islamic feminism then we would quickly become the useful idiots for Islamists rather than the other way around
There's no reason that should have to happen. There's a big difference between calling ourselves Islamic feminists and advocating that approach, and saying that that work can get a lot accomplished and we should solidarize to a degree with it.

[black magick hustla]

I dont think its islamic feminism though. When muslim workers strike is it muslim class struggle? its just people who happen to be muslim. it seems to me islamic feminism is an invention of western hippies

[gorillafuck]

there are probably some feminist orgs in muslim countries with muslim adherents, but it seems to me this people are just "feminists" who happen to be muslim

I completely agree

Islamic Feminism is contradictory to the point where one of the terms will have to lose it's meaning.

[jake williams]

I dont think its islamic feminism though. When muslim workers strike is it muslim class struggle? its just people who happen to be muslim. it seems to me islamic feminism is an invention of western hippies
It's a spectrum, it's sort of a shorthand for a complex array of political phenomena. The basic fact is that a lot of people living in Muslim countries identify very strongly as Muslims and take Islam for granted as part of any "feminist theory" they might come up with. Certainly there are more secularized people in the Muslim world, even if they too identify to some degree (often a lesser degree, sometimes not) as Muslims. But "Islamic feminism" is certainly not just an invention. It might not be like an absolute specific thing, but neither is Western feminism.

[Devrim]

But "Islamic feminism" is certainly not just an invention. It might not be like an absolute specific thing, but neither is Western feminism.

But would you think that it was correct if we started to call 'Western feminism' 'Christian feminism'?

Devrim

[jake williams]

But would you think that it was correct if we started to call 'Western feminism' 'Christian feminism'?

Devrim
While I don't totally dismiss the relevance of language use, there's a tenuous balance between being careful and being pedantic. And I don't think we should pretend that the relationship between the West and Christianity is the same as that between Islam and countries with majority Muslim populations, I think reasonably referred to as the Islamic world.

You surely recognize that even in Turkey, Islam has has a far bigger place in the public sphere than Christianity does perhaps even in the United States, especially recently, and probably would be even more so if it were a more democratic country. Islam is certainly more significant in the lives of a billion and a half "Muslims" than Christianity is in the lives of two billion "Christians". Your secularism is more atypical than mine. I don't discount the importance or variety of secularism in Turkey, the Arab world, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and so on, but it's very easy to overstate it.

We shouldn't skirt around all that. I think some honesty is due.

[Devrim]

You surely recognize that even in Turkey, Islam has has a far bigger place in the public sphere than Christianity does perhaps even in the United States, especially recently, and probably would be even more so if it were a more democratic country. Islam is certainly more significant in the lives of a billion and a half "Muslims" than Christianity is in the lives of two billion "Christians". Your secularism is more atypical than mine. I don't discount the importance or variety of secularism in Turkey, the Arab world, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and so on, but it's very easy to overstate it.

I don't think that you really know what you are talking about here at all. I have been to the USA and in my opinion religion there has a much greater space in the public sphere there than in Turkey*.

Your comments about 'democracy' also appear to based on little more than Western prejudice.

Devrim

*Although it is true that Turkey is a very different country from say saudi Arabia.

[jake williams]

I don't think that you really know what you are talking about here at all. I have been to the USA and in my opinion religion there has a much greater space in the public sphere there than in Turkey*.

Your comments about 'democracy' also appear to based on little more than Western prejudice.

Devrim

*Although it is true that Turkey is a very different country from say saudi Arabia.
The USA is an extreme case, I think. Everywhere in the world has its religious fundamentalists, but the US represents a special case. That said, you know better than I do that Turkey's population is by and large opposed to the government's forced secularism, that it's something of a facade. To be a little more personal than I probably should be, I spend a lot of time wishing that strong, secular leftist political movements made up a major proportion of the populations of Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia. They don't. They exist and they're important, but they're a sharp minority.

The usual Western error is, of course, to assume that everything south of the Mediterranean and east of Greece is just a fundamentalist haze of crazies, anywhere and everywhere full of endless masses of Islamist fanatics. Of course that's not true. Of course Islam is not the whole of the lives of Muslims, of course there is depth and variety in a spectrum of societies that stretches from the Atlantic across Africa and Asia to the Pacific, and so on and so on.

But there's also a leftist fantasy that none of these people are really Muslims, that it's all just a show, that there'll be a revolution any moment now and that'll all go away.

What do you think of Erdogan?

[Devrim]

That said, you know better than I do that Turkey's population is by and large opposed to the government's forced secularism, that it's something of a facade.

Turkey has an Islamic party (a bit like European Christian democrats) in Government, which is currently serving its second term, and which won 46.6% of the vote in the last general election.

I don't think that you really know what the situation is.


To be a little more personal than I probably should be, I spend a lot of time wishing that strong, secular leftist political movements made up a major proportion of the populations of Turkey, Pakistan, Egypt, or Saudi Arabia. They don't. They exist and they're important, but they're a sharp minority.

I don't spend my time wishing for these things. I think that we have a very different view of political dynamics. There were big secularist demonstrations in Turkey a couple of years ago, one and a half million people in Ankara, over two million in İzmir, and over one million in İstanbul, a minority certainly, but not an insignificant one.


But there's also a leftist fantasy that none of these people are really Muslims, that it's all just a show, that there'll be a revolution any moment now and that'll all go away.

But I don't think that that is anything I have suggested.

What I was saying is that there is a problem with taking people's religion as the central point. According to statistics I read 93% of the US population believe in God. I don't see people talking about Chritians going on strike in the US though.


What do you think of Erdogan?

He is just another centre right politician.

Devrim

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Doesn't Turkey have quite a proud tradition of secularism?

[jake williams]

Devrim - I don't think we disagree as much as it seems. We can do this by PM if you think it's hijacking the thread a bit though.

Noxion - it's a bit of a messy story. Yes and no. Again, I don't want this to turn into a whole mess, but the history of Turkish secularism is deeply integrated with a pretty vicious nationalism.

[Revy]

Most religions are overtly patriarchal, even Eastern religions that were once celebrated by the "counter-culture" like Buddhism and Hinduism.

All of the changes in religious interpretation of the Bible, happened because society changed, and religion followed. After all, who could argue the unambiguous sexism of 1st Corinthians, Chapter 14, verses 34 to 36: "As in all the churches of the saints, women should be silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as the law says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church."

Yet, as I wake up in the morning, I am treated to on the television the preachy voice of televangelist Joyce Meyer, who is unquestionably female. I doubt she would ever quote this passage in front of her congregation, though, as she quotes many other passages.

Is Joyce Meyer able to preach because women advanced themselves in the church or because they advanced themselves in the greater society?

[superiority]

To the extent that there exists a specifically "Islamic" feminism that could legitimately be called feminist*, all it does is encourage people to discard the inconvenient (in this case patriarchal) parts of Islam where they conflict with basic human decency, which serves to contribute to the irrelevance of religion in day-to-day life. I can't see how this is a bad thing.



*There are, I don't doubt, "Christian feminist" groups in the United States and around the world that could probable be more accurately described as anti- or pseudo-feminist - Feminists for Life comes to mind, though I don't think they identify as specifically Christian.

[RHIZOMES]

Are you serious?

progressing female emancipation from an often patriarchal and overbearing religion like Islam is good. Furthering that faith isn't an aim we should be celebrating however.


Cheers on wilfully misunderstanding what I meant and then saying what I said. :lol:


I think he might have meant it as Islam becoming more progressive, not progressing Islam's influence.

But I agree with your post.

MIGHT have meant? It was pretty obvious what I meant if she cared to read the entire post in it's context rather than reading "progressing Islam" and flipping out.

[Labor Shall Rule]

TC,

Ideas are abstractions from concrete determinations, so it is impossible for them to have 'real' meanings outside of what it is conceptualized as by the material authors that are enacting them. If the methodology that you use is to interpret a person's belief on the basis of the literal contemporary meaning of the texts that they adhere to, then you are supplanting materialism for a crude form of atheist idealism. It's good for the likes of Hitchens, Harris, or Dawkins, but not for Marxist materialists.

Islam is not a religion that inherently perpetuates exploitation and oppression. Anti-capitalism is unfrequent, episodic, and chaotic in ideological appearance in the Muslim world. It's not because the level of culture is lowly and slavish to a crazed faith that has all Arabs in a strangehold, but because Wahhabism (and other "extremist" Shiite variants) has physically wiped out the secular left. As so, it is much more hegemonic over Muslims.

[Devrim]

because Wahhabism (and other "extremist" Shiite variants) has physically wiped out the secular left. As so, it is much more hegemonic over Muslims.

Wahhabism is a Sunni, not Shia, denomination.

Devrim

[Labor Shall Rule]

Wahhabism is a Sunni, not Shia, denomination.

Devrim

I know. I meant "variants" as in, variations of political Islam.

[progressive_lefty]

I think the left can be seen as being much more sophisticated about how to approach issues with-in Islam and the Muslim world, unlike the right's approach which is about demonisation, toal unexceptance of Islam and creating racist films like Obsession (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsession:_Radical_Islam%27s_War_Against_the_West) . The left must be strong is supporting Islamic reforms and 'Islamic feminism', but only in the sense that its what the people want. I find there are a lot of Muslim women in my city that are happy with their faith, so I do not believe that Islam is hostile to women everywhere. I think the right always trys to attack the left as having a double standard of 'standing up for muslims' or 'being politicaly correct', but I find its just the left doing what it always does, that is standing in the face of discrimination or ignorance.