Log in

View Full Version : Lady Gaga’s New Low: Why “Burqa Swag” Needs to STOP



Quail
19th August 2013, 13:09
Editorial (http://feminspire.com/category/editorial/)Social Issues (http://feminspire.com/category/editorial/social-issues/)
50 Comments (http://feminspire.com/lady-gagas-new-low-why-burqa-swag-needs-to-stop/#disqus_thread) Lady Gagas New Low: Why Burqa Swag Needs to STOP

http://feminspire.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/1375812588_207904_1375814161_noticia_normal.jpg



McKayla Reilly (http://feminspire.com/lady-gagas-new-low-why-burqa-swag-needs-to-stop/) | On 12, Aug 2013
Lady Gaga has evidently plummeted to new lows with the leak of her new track Burqa (http://www.queerty.com/listen-demo-of-lady-gagas-burqa-from-artpop-leaks-20130806/). While her appropriation of the burqa pre-dates the leak, the song has proven to be yet another degrading, exotification of Muslim women enforcing the saviour attitude that is so popular in the West, which views Muslim women of all nationalities as outsiders who need to be liberated from their supposed perpetual prison.
As a Muslim living in North America, I couldnt function in just a hijab, the most covert of the Muslim garbs. People threw rocks at me, asked me ignorant/offensive questions like why I chose to subject myself to an inherently patriarchal religion, called me a terrorist, and so many more incidences I cant even keep track. Yet its totally cool to play dress-up with hair and face coverings as long as it doesnt have anything to do with an actual Muslim? Newsflash: Its not a costume (http://feminspire.com/dear-cultural-appropriators-stop-love-halloween/) for you to wear, its not another one of your attention-seeking meat/frog dresses, its a symbol of my religion NOT a fashion statement.

http://feminspire.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Burqa.jpg (http://feminspire.com/lady-gagas-new-low-why-burqa-swag-needs-to-stop/burqa/)
While it hasnt been officially confirmed that Burqa is a leak from her upcoming album, Lady Gaga was reportedly posting (http://unrealitytv.com/dont-do-it-little-monsters-gaga-urges-fans-not-to-listen-to-the-unfinished-burqaaura-leak/) on littlemonsters.com requesting fans report links to the track because it was an unfinished demo. She also tweeted a reference to the song in October:
http://feminspire.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Screen-Shot-2013-08-12-at-1.30.53-PM-300x76.png
Lady Gaga isnt the only one unable to comprehend how offensive appropriating someones cultural/religious custom is. Soon after the leak, Twitter was flooded with fans posting pictures of themselves with towels, blankets and shirts wrapped around their faces with the hashtag #burqaswag (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23burqaswag&mode=relevance&src=typd):

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BRBCEuuCcAAIXzH.jpg:large (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BRBCEuuCcAAIXzH.jpg:large)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BRBSg35CUAAwydy.jpg:large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BRGhMZ7CYAAjhnR.jpg:large

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BRH3HakCAAEQmrK.jpg:large
Adam Abboud, one of the many voices within the Muslim community condemning Lady Gaga and her fans, created the tumblr Racist Little Monsters (http://racistlittlemonsters.tumblr.com/) in response to #burqaswag (https://twitter.com/search?q=%23burqaswag&mode=relevance&src=typd). Essentially, the blog and the format it follows responds to Lady Gaga and her numerous non-Muslim Gaga fans that chose to drape themselves catering to fetish and pop culture without understanding the political and social consequences of doing so. Adam also emphasized the undertones of violence stemming from within Lady Gagas burqa controversy:

Lady Gagas obsession with the burqa is not coincidental regarding the current foreign policy of the United States; her co-opting of the burqa feeds into a consuming Western stomach, hungry for images of oppressed Muslim women that need saving. These constructions function within the current framework of the war on terror, and produce complicit populations that allow occupation and war in the name of feminism. Historically, images of draped women helped justify occupations like those of Iraq and Afghanistan after the wars were branded as missions to liberate Muslim women.
My last Feminspire piece (http://feminspire.com/ending-violence-against-women-why-we-cant-let-the-taliban-take-over-again/) was about exactly that the result of occupations like Iraq and Afghanistan, which, as Adam also pointed out, has ironically devastated the status of women. Despite all that has been said about the song, there was one line that didnt make me want to vomit all over my laptop: Im not a wandering slave I am a woman of choice, my veil is protection for the gorgeousness of my face. The sexualization of Muslim women can be viewed as an attempt to have Muslim women recognized as powerful, independent women women who are inherently sexual, just like non-Muslim women are perceived to be.
Thats a major stretch however, and Ilana Alazzeh (http://about.me/ilanatree), a prominent voice in the Muslim feminist community, disagrees with this perspective: Muslim women can speak for themselves. This is white savior syndrome; we need allies to help raise our collective voices, not capitalize on oppressing them. Ilanas point about capitalizing on the oppressive image of Muslim women is extremely important, considering that Lady Gaga is profiting from appropriating Muslim garb: from the degrading trend pioneered by her fans consisting of a game of dress-up where adorning Muslim garb is seen as some sort of hilarious joke, and from exotifying and sexualizing Muslim women in the song itself. Ilana continues:

The sexualization comes from this need to colonize Muslim women and their wombs to invade and purify. Its why the Western man hates the hijab and covering, because its an overt way of saying My body is for me and Ill choose you if I want you, which is reversing the gaze in such a way that women are typically inaccessible. Liberating Muslim women from hijab/burqa is a centuries old concept and it was one of the reasons why Europe colonized the Middle East, or so they say. So, sexualizing a woman in burqa/hijab is the easiest way to demean, dehumanize, and take away power from women who only want to share their sexuality with a few, or just dont want to be defined by their sexuality at all. It will sell, and it will seem rebellious. Its not like rap, which comes from the streets speaking from the heart, and debunks the status quo; this type of music is about reinforcing the status quo. Its about non-Muslim women capitalizing on speaking for and over Muslim womens voices.
Pointing out that Muslim women cover in various ways in order to avoid being sexualized epitomizes exactly why the song alone is offensive. Muslim women who choose to cover, whether it be a hijab, niqab or burqa, do so in order to avoid the superficial prison built within patriarchal culture where women are only worth their sexual value. The song attempts to strip Muslim women of this rejection of the male gaze, completely ignoring the outcry of Muslim women who demand not to be sexualized. The lyrics Do you wanna see me naked, lover? Do you wanna peak underneath the cover? are extremely invasive to the female Muslim community, forcing Muslim women to be fetishized and exotified against their will.

http://feminspire.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/a_4x-horizontal-700x325.jpg
Pop star Selena Gomez was also recently called out (http://feminspire.com/selena-gomez-what-are-you-doing/) for her appropriation of Indian culture. Selenas appropriation, while offensive, still doesnt quite match up to what Lady Gaga is doing. While Selena Gomez appropriated certain cultural characteristics like Indian dance and fashion for her video, Lady Gaga took it one step further and made sweeping statements against the voices of actual Muslim woman.
Then theres M.I.A., another musician who depicted a different culture in the music video for her song Bad Girls. However, her song made a tribute to Arab culture, and it had great (although at times controversial) reception from the Muslim feminist community. M.I.A. depicts Arab culture hated and demonized by Western media as the exciting and unique culture it actually is.
M.I.A. includes Muslim women wearing niqabs/hijabs in her video, yet it is entirely different from Lady Gaga sporting it as a costume. For one, M.I.A. is a woman of colour, herself othered by Western society like Muslim women are. Secondly, M.I.A.s video was in solidarity with the Women to Drive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_to_drive_movement) movement, a criticism of the fact Saudi women are denied the right to drive, rural areas being the only exception. M.I.A. lent her voice and political activism to Muslim women instead of screaming against them.
Ilana commented on this contrast, When M.I.A. wore the niqab, she got a lot of hate. When Lady Gaga tosses around the burqa it seems radical. M.I.A. has a history of not saying things for a buck and being raw and true to her background, lyrics and culture. Its not her culture, true, but there are a lot of Desis in the Middle East, especially Sri Lankans their nationality is synonymous with servant in many parts of the Arab world, but M.I.A is not above capitalizing on being raw and on the edge with embracing the Arab the hated Arab. For better or for worse, her culture Sri Lankan culture is tied with Arab culture. The song Burqa is simply an anthem of colonization.
Writer Dina Dabbous also analyzed Bad Girls (http://www.albawaba.com/editorchoice/defence-mias-bad-girl-arab-bashing-412426) in defense of the criticism it was receiving, If shes being accused of stereotyping, then shes turning the oriental fantasy on its head when she has Arabian women dressed in khaki styled though still Arabian dress or gear, toting guns and strutting their stuff with a swagger unknown to the conservative female society that has women closed off from the male gaze. M.I.As girls are a far-cry from the harem-veiled subversive mysterious women of the oriental fantasy in their floaty feminine veils. Dinas point further emphasizes the difference between M.I.A.s Bad Girls and Lady Gagas Burqa, as Lady Gaga simply reinforced the oriental fantasy that Dina is referring to.
http://www.pukhtoonistangazette.com/images_news/large/pashtunpost_fa_910309170.jpg
Outside of Lady Gagas appropriation, the burqa itself is a touchy subject even among Muslims, as many deem it to be oppressive while others assert that its a choice. The burqa cannot be viewed entirely as a choice or entirely as a symbol of oppression; the politics surrounding the burqa are not that black-and-white. It would be more precise to acknowledge that while in some places it symbolizes oppression like the blue burqa above that is the signature of Taliban reign in Afghanistan it is also a symbol of freedom from patriarchal culture and the male gaze.
However, discussing one side of the burqa debate does not have to come at the cost of the other can we not just address that it symbolizes both oppression and choice? Its fair to say, given the content of the song Burqa, that Lady Gaga is entirely clueless to these discussions of the burqa within Muslim cultures and communities. She is only deprecating the burqa and what it symbolizes for both sides, screaming over the voices of the Muslim women who dont want to be sexualized and against the voices of Muslim women who live in oppressive environments where the burqa is a physical symbol of that oppression.
So, Lady Gaga and fans, STOP appropriating the cultural/religious garb of Muslim women, and stop thinking you are some sort of ally to the Muslim feminist community by sticking in one lyric about being a woman of choice. Better yet, just eliminate the song off of the album altogether, because every second it continues to be promoted you are trivializing the voices of Muslim women everywhere.

Source. (http://feminspire.com/lady-gagas-new-low-why-burqa-swag-needs-to-stop/)

Sasha
19th August 2013, 14:14
For some reason I was reminded of this rather excellent "sex and the city 2" review;
http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/burkas-and-birkins/Content?oid=4132715

Niall
19th August 2013, 14:51
That woman is fecking daft

Admiral Swagmeister G-Funk
20th August 2013, 09:47
never thought much of her or understood why she's seen as subversive. i suppose she only is within the remit of the mtv world.

she's a figurehead of our shallow and superficial culture - the arse-end of the disaster that adorno was talking about.

Os Cangaceiros
22nd August 2013, 05:07
Some of those imitators look more like they're imitating Tuareg styles, not burquas...

Slavic
22nd August 2013, 07:01
I don't understand why people get so upset over clothing. Do Christians foam at the mouth when ever a rapper wears a golden 'blinded' cross? Why the obsession with the 'proper' wearing of clothing. If Lady Gaga wants to wear a colorful burqa, does it hurt any one?

Quail
22nd August 2013, 09:42
Can we stay on topic please? The contents of Lady Gaga's pants are irrelevant.

hatzel
22nd August 2013, 10:53
Some of those imitators look more like they're imitating Tuareg styles, not burquas...

Not like we should be surprised at all, of course. Those who go down (borderline) racist routes such as this also tend to go down the 'Muslims be Muslims amirite monolithic mass from Rabat to Dhaka seen one seen them all lulz'-route. Anything as long as it's vaguely 'exotic,' you know?

SonofRage
22nd August 2013, 17:02
I don't understand why people get so upset over clothing. Do Christians foam at the mouth when ever a rapper wears a golden 'blinded' cross? Why the obsession with the 'proper' wearing of clothing. If Lady Gaga wants to wear a colorful burqa, does it hurt any one?

The same reason "cracker" isn't really a racial slur. Maybe in a country/region where Christians are an oppressed minority it would be different. Otherwise there's no power behind it.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 4

Sperm-Doll Setsuna
22nd August 2013, 17:14
Can we stop this shit about Lady Caca being a "man/trans" just because she's ugly, too? It's a fucking embarrassment to see people on here even going at that.

Fourth Internationalist
22nd August 2013, 17:57
I don't see what's so offensive. Personally, I think the burqa (or whatever they're called, I'm sorry I don't honestly know) can look really cool and beautiful, and I don't really care for Islam (or any religion).

RedBen
22nd August 2013, 18:09
I don't see what's so offensive. Personally, I think the burqa (or whatever they're called, I'm sorry I don't honestly know) can look really cool and beautiful, and I don't really care for Islam (or any religion).
it's not pc, and the left loves out pcing eachother. pop stars do stupid shit all the time, it makes people talk and sells gossip magazines. they think it makes them relevant, like alecia keyes claiming to be an anarchist and donating 500 whole whopping dollars...... the the democrat party, or paris hilton's "vote or die" shirt...:glare: you militant atheist you...

Art Vandelay
22nd August 2013, 20:18
I don't see what's so offensive. Personally, I think the burqa (or whatever they're called, I'm sorry I don't honestly know) can look really cool and beautiful, and I don't really care for Islam (or any religion).

Did you read the article? Cause there were quite a few reasons listed in it, explaining why it was offensive.

Brutus
22nd August 2013, 20:25
it's not pc, and the left loves out pcing eachother. pop stars do stupid shit all the time, it makes people talk and sells gossip magazines. they think it makes them relevant, like alecia keyes claiming to be an anarchist and donating 500 whole whopping dollars...... the the democrat party, or paris hilton's "vote or die" shirt...:glare: you militant atheist you...

Is that where she said she admired Ernesto Guevara and had a gold Kalashnikov necklace? Anarchist as fuck, brah.

Fourth Internationalist
22nd August 2013, 20:34
Did you read the article? Cause there were quite a few reasons listed in it, explaining why it was offensive.

Yes, I did. My point was that I don't agree with the offended people on their resons for being offended. The burqa is a beautiful piece of clothing, so is the hijab, so I don't think they must be religious. I also don't think this story is a big deal. She wore a burqa, so? It seems like the offended people are making it a big deal.

SonofRage
22nd August 2013, 20:39
Can we stop this shit about Lady Caca being a "man/trans" just because she's ugly, too? It's a fucking embarrassment to see people on here even going at that.

Her being "ugly" is a subjective thing and just seems mean and unnecessary to say .

Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 4

Art Vandelay
22nd August 2013, 20:55
Yes, I did. My point was that I don't agree with the offended people on their resons for being offended. The burqa is a beautiful piece of clothing, so is the hijab, so I don't think they must be religious. I also don't think this story is a big deal. She wore a burqa, so? It seems like the offended people are making it a big deal.

Then you're perhaps not understanding what they're saying, because they are raising some valid points. A burqa isn't a fashion statement, its a religious symbol, which alot of people take highly seriously. It would be similar if I started walking around my home town wearing a turban, despite being a 20 year old white Canadian male (admittedly this example isn't completely transferable since the burqa also raises some patriarchal issues as well), needless to say it would not be a surprise if some people found that offensive.

Perhaps you should re-read this part in particular, because it really makes a good point:


Adam Abboud, one of the many voices within the Muslim community condemning Lady Gaga and her fans, created the tumblr Racist Little Monsters in response to #burqaswag. “Essentially, the blog and the format it follows responds to Lady Gaga and her numerous non-Muslim Gaga fans that chose to drape themselves catering to fetish and pop culture without understanding the political and social consequences of doing so.” Adam also emphasized the undertones of violence stemming from within Lady Gaga’s burqa controversy:
“Lady Gaga’s obsession with the burqa is not coincidental regarding the current foreign policy of the United States; her co-opting of the burqa feeds into a consuming Western stomach, hungry for images of oppressed Muslim women that need saving. These constructions function within the current framework of the war on terror, and produce complicit populations that allow occupation and war in the name of feminism. Historically, images of draped women helped justify occupations like those of Iraq and Afghanistan after the wars were branded as missions to liberate Muslim women.”

Not only is this a discrimination issue, touching on aspects of sexism and chauvinism (not to mention just insensitivity towards the cultures of others), but as Marxists we also recognize that the phenomena which exists within the social superstructure, is ultimately intrinsically linked with the economic base of society. This can't be shrugged off as simply people making 'too big of a deal out of this' and we certainly can't take a dialectical approach towards attempting to understand the intricacies of appropriation of surplus value, to then simply discard it when it comes to confronting issues dealing with discrimination. Shit like this helps to reinforce the arrogant savior complex, that the article makes mention of repeatedly. For example:


“Muslim women can speak for themselves. This is white savior syndrome; we need allies to help raise our collective voices, not capitalize on oppressing them.” Ilana’s point about capitalizing on the oppressive image of Muslim women is extremely important, considering that Lady Gaga is profiting from appropriating Muslim garb: from the degrading trend pioneered by her fans consisting of a game of dress-up where adorning Muslim garb is seen as some sort of hilarious joke, and from exotifying and sexualizing Muslim women in the song itself. So, sexualizing a woman in burqa/hijab is the easiest way to demean, dehumanize, and take away power from women who only want to share their sexuality with a few, or just don’t want to be defined by their sexuality at all. It will sell, and it will seem rebellious. It’s not like rap, which comes from the streets speaking from the heart, and debunks the status quo; this type of music is about reinforcing the status quo. It’s about non-Muslim women capitalizing on speaking for and over Muslim women’s voices.”
Pointing out that Muslim women cover in various ways in order to avoid being sexualized epitomizes exactly why the song alone is offensive. Muslim women who choose to cover, whether it be a hijab, niqab or burqa, do so in order to avoid the superficial prison built within patriarchal culture where women are only worth their sexual value. The song attempts to strip Muslim women of this rejection of the male gaze, completely ignoring the outcry of Muslim women who demand not to be sexualized. The lyrics “Do you wanna see me naked, lover? Do you wanna peak underneath the cover?” are extremely invasive to the female Muslim community, forcing Muslim women to be fetishized and exotified against their will.

So when you make the comments that you do, that this is merely the left being the typical PC police (which I agree happens much too often, but this really isn't an example of it) and that people are getting worked up over nothing, I'm left with two thoughts; either (1) you didn't read the article, or (2) you're being dismissive of the perspective of the article, without giving the topic the consideration it warrants. Regardless, whichever one it is, they're both highly problematic for a radical.

Art Vandelay
22nd August 2013, 21:15
garbage

Quail, or some other mod has already deleted stuff from this thread, you're just making more work for them. This is the discrimination subforum, if you want to make comments like this take it to chit chat.

Fourth Internationalist
22nd August 2013, 21:23
Then you're perhaps not understanding what they're saying, because they are raising some valid points. A burqa isn't a fashion statement, its a religious symbol, which alot of people take highly seriously.

Again, as I said, I don't particularly care for religions or what they take offense to, whether it be cursing the Holy Spirt, being gay, or wearing a burqa. I like the look of what I view as merely a piece of clothing. I love how beautiful they look, and so wearing one regardless of religion is fine to me. I'd wear one if I could because they're so beautiful.


It would be similar if I started walking around my home town wearing a turban, despite being a 20 year old white Canadian male (admittedly this example isn't completely transferable since the burqa also raises some patriarchal issues as well), needless to say it would not be a surprise if some people found that offensive.

You can do that if you want (I don't particularly see them as beautiful clothing) I don't see any spiritual significance in that sort of clothing, so I don't care who wears it.


Perhaps you should re-read this part in particular, because it really makes a good point:

Not only is this a discrimination issue, touching on aspects of sexism and chauvinism (not to mention just insensitivity towards the cultures of others), but as Marxists we also recognize that the phenomena which exists within the social superstructure, is ultimately intrinsically linked with the economic base of society. This can't be shrugged off as simply people making 'too big of a deal out of this' and we certainly can't take a dialectical approach towards attempting to understand the intricacies of appropriation of surplus value, to then simply discard it when it comes to confronting issues dealing with discrimination. Shit like this helps to reinforce the arrogant savior complex, that the article makes mention of repeatedly. For example:

I can see how using the burqa or the hijab or whatever can be used to justify militarism. However, I didn't see her advocate invading Iraq. Maybe people think she's secretly trying to say that or that all Moslem women are oppressed or whatever, but all I see is an attempt to get more attention by wearing a 'controversial' piece of clothing. Of course, my point is that it is just a piece of clothing.


So when you make the comments that you do, that this is merely the left being the typical PC police (which I agree happens much too often, but this really isn't an example of it) and that people are getting worked up over nothing, I'm left with two thoughts; either (1) you didn't read the article, or (2) you're being dismissive of the perspective of the article, without giving the topic the consideration it warrants. Regardless, whichever one it is, they're both highly problematic for a radical.

I see the perspective of the article, but the article, for example, is saying how it reinforces the idea that the Iraq wars and stuff were justified by saving women and all that stuff. I just don't get that feeling from her little stunt.

hatzel
22nd August 2013, 22:06
I like the look of what I view as merely a piece of clothing. I love how beautiful they look, and so wearing one regardless of religion is fine to me. I'd wear one if I could because they're so beautiful.

...and then people in the street would spit at you and try to strip it off you and all sorts of nasty stuff because that's exactly what happens to women who wear them, unless they happen to be Gaga acting all edgy and white about it. Not that she seems to realise that distinction. If you listen to the actual song, you'll notice that in between talking about fucking big dicks and turning the burqa from a symbol of modesty to some kind of kinky fetish wear, she (the 'enigma popstar,' as she would have it) seems to claim that she's pretty much the same as a burqa-clad woman because they're both, like...hiding something away and people want to see them as they are underneath. But it's obviously utterly ridiculous to even go anywhere near that kind of talk because being an enigmatic popstar behind some self-constructed 'aura' isn't anything like being an actual living Muslimah in a burqa, you know? Using the burqa to represent the character 'Lady Gaga' and its relationship with Stefani Germanotta really isn't such an admirable move.


Of course, my point is that it is just a piece of clothing.

To you it's 'just a piece of clothing,' but to those who wear it (willingly or unwillingly) it most certainly isn't. Nor is it 'just a piece of clothing' to those who try to pull it off, or judge those women who wear it, or make all sorts of political statements about it. So why do you think we should accept the claim that it's 'just a piece of clothing' when it is a piece of clothing which is imbued with all sorts of meanings and significations by people across the spectrum? And although Gaga claims that 'she wear [sic] burqa for fashion, it's not a statement as much as just a move of passion,' it's clear that she also sees it as an intensely loaded garment, rather than 'just a piece of clothing,' so...yeah, not sure why we'd let that argument fly...

Fourth Internationalist
22nd August 2013, 22:16
...and then people in the street would spit at you and try to strip it off you and all sorts of nasty stuff because that's exactly what happens to women who wear them, I'm not advocating anything like that, nor am I arguing that people who do that aren't wrong.




To you it's 'just a piece of clothing,' but to those who wear it (willingly or unwillingly) it most certainly isn't. Nor is it 'just a piece of clothing' to those who try to pull it off, or judge those women who wear it, or make all sorts of political statements about it. I know, and I am against that.


So why do you think we should accept the claim that it's 'just a piece of clothing' when it is a piece of clothing which is imbued with all sorts of meanings and significations by people across the spectrum? Because the problem is people continue to see it as "bad" or "terroristic" or "oppressive" etc. If we stop seeing it that way, these issues wouldn't happen.


And although Gaga claims that 'she wear [sic] burqa for fashion, it's not a statement as much as just a move of passion,' it's clear that she also sees it as an intensely loaded garment, rather than 'just a piece of clothing,' so...yeah, not sure why we'd let that argument fly...I know, that's exactly why she wore it. I just don't think it was sending militaristic messages rather than a stunt for attention.

Tolstoy
22nd August 2013, 23:10
In all truth, the making of Islam fashionable, while being very shallow is the first step towards cultural acceptance in general american society

Rafiq
22nd August 2013, 23:29
There is a lot of bullshit in that article. The veil is objectively sexist and oppressive. There can be no debate in that regard. It exists to directly control the sexuality of women. It doesn't matter if some see it as something else, that is the cultural context from which it arose, to say that Islam empowers women by protecting them from their oh so dangerous intimate sexual desires which may or may not involve showing off their bodies is the most ridiculous thing I've heard today. One thing the veil does and has done in Muslim countries is create an environment which is dangerous for women who don't want to wear that symbol of female submission. It gives men the O.K. to give into their predatory urges when women don't cover up. Women should be able to wear whatever the fuck they want without being objectified, it's men who have to change, not the cosmetic preferences of women.

Rafiq
22nd August 2013, 23:36
In all truth, the making of Islam fashionable, while being very shallow is the first step towards cultural acceptance in general american society

By making Islam an exception with regards to opposing religion, you degrade Muslims and make it as if they are incapable of adopting western values. Which they very well should. You're a fool if you don't think so. The very intellectual foundations from which you say so are objectively western. It is unacceptable to harass women over what they wear period, but the last thing the left should be doing is throwing feminist twists on vile and reactionary symbols of backwardness like the veil, the same veil which, mind you, has always been combatted historically by 'progressive' forces in the 'Muslim world', the same ones, mind you that fought against colonization and imperialism.

Le Socialiste
22nd August 2013, 23:39
Quail, or some other mod has already deleted stuff from this thread, you're just making more work for them. This is the discrimination subforum, if you want to make comments like this take it to chit chat.

Figured I'd take care of it, since I was here already. RedBen, please refrain from off-topic posts like that from now on. Someone already went through and removed the other related posts, no need to contribute more off-topic nonsense.

Rafiq
22nd August 2013, 23:49
It's like people forget that there exists a class struggle in predominantly Muslim places and a struggle against the remnants of feudalism. These "Muslim intellectuals" can go fuck themselves, they have the same access to the resources which allow us to come to conclusions that I or anyone else does, these college level scum, self righteous reactionary pricks should be the last to be catered to by the left. I mean they're educated, what's the difference between them and the scum libertarian, or Christian reactionary you find every so often? Do Islamist (They're not intellectuals who just happen to be Muslims, they claim to represent the "Muslim community") intellectuals strike you as the type of people who would be pro abortion, supportive of lgbt rights, against religion in schools and so on? They're vile anti communists. Anyone who knows or have met one will understand me here. These pricks sit comfortably at home and cheer on Islamist groups like the MB in Egypt and militants in Syria under the guise of bourgeois liberal democratic rhetoric. It sickens me.

Art Vandelay
23rd August 2013, 00:36
Because the problem is people continue to see it as "bad" or "terroristic" or "oppressive" etc. If we stop seeing it that way, these issues wouldn't happen.

This is precisely the problem. A group of oppressed minorities explain the ways in which shit like 'burqa swag' is effecting them, the ways in which it helps to reinforce negative aspects of capitalist society (and I certainly don't mean to imply we have to accept everything they say) and then a north american male communist (who has no frame of reference to even begin to put himself in their shoes) can come in and flippantly dismiss the issues raised and actually has the arrogance to blame the victim, ie: 'if they would just stop seeing it as 'bad' or 'oppressive' then this wouldn't be an issues.' That is such an anti-materialist analysis that I don't even know where to begin and secondly I'm not trying to single you out Aang, cause this is quite a large issue among the left.

One thing I have absolutely no doubt in my mind about, is that if the left wants to have any serious chance of organizing our class into a class for itself, then we need a very serious change in culture and a very serious change in the way we orientate ourselves to oppressed minorities within our class.

Fourth Internationalist
23rd August 2013, 00:54
This is precisely the problem. A group of oppressed minorities explain the ways in which shit like 'burqa swag' is effecting them, the ways in which it helps to reinforce negative aspects of capitalist society (and I certainly don't mean to imply we have to accept everything they say) But how is it reinforcing US imperialism and colonization? I didn't get that out of Lady Gaga's stunt at all. These women get that message from it, but I don't see that at all. That's a large part of the article, but I'm not getting that at all from the stunt.


and then a north american male communist (who has no frame of reference to even begin to put himself in their shoes) can come in and flippantly dismiss the issues raised and actually has the arrogance to blame the victim, ie: 'if they would just stop seeing it as 'bad' or 'oppressive' then this wouldn't be an issues.' That is such an anti-materialist analysis that I don't even know where to begin and secondly I'm not trying to single you out Aang, cause this is quite a large issue among the left. My point about the bad and oppressive part wasn't about the Moslem women who wear the clothing. The Moslem women who wear it out of choice don't think it's "bad" or "oppressive" when they choose to wear it, which is good. I'm talking about the people who oppose the clothing, because as you (was it you or someone else?) mentioned the discrimination women face for choosing to wear the burqa, hijab, etc.

Art Vandelay
23rd August 2013, 01:24
But how is it reinforcing US imperialism and colonization? I didn't get that out of Lady Gaga's stunt at all. These women get that message from it, but I don't see that at all. That's a large part of the article, but I'm not getting that at all from the stunt.

Well this was the quote where they made a specific allusion to U.S. foreign policy:


“Lady Gaga’s obsession with the burqa is not coincidental regarding the current foreign policy of the United States; her co-opting of the burqa feeds into a consuming Western stomach, hungry for images of oppressed Muslim women that need saving. These constructions function within the current framework of the war on terror, and produce complicit populations that allow occupation and war in the name of feminism. Historically, images of draped women helped justify occupations like those of Iraq and Afghanistan after the wars were branded as missions to liberate Muslim women.”

Now obviously this isn't stemming from a Marxist perspective, so it is ultimately an inadequate analysis. Having said that, that doesn't mean that there isn't merit to what is being stated here, it just merely needs to be included into a broader societal methodology. I think too often Marxists tend to be economic reductionists (to a certain extent this is necessary) but the relationship between the social superstructure and the economic base of society is hardly uni-causal. We need to be concerned with the ways in which capitalism creates artificial divisions within the working class (sexism, homophobia, racism, etc) and we need to be open to shutting the fuck up for a minute or two and listening to what these people have to say. We need a proper understanding of the realities of oppressed minorities, in order to further develop a revolutionary line which not only combats these reactionary sentiments in society, but also works towards ending one classes monopoly on the means of production and private property. Far too often the left does only one or the other (too narrow of a focus strictly on class, or falls into lifestylism), but both are intrinsically linked.

The rather flippant way you dismissed what was being expressed, is rather typical of the left and I certainly didn't mean to jump on you, or attack you, although I'm sure it somewhat came across that way. Between a book I just finished up reading and the recent discussion in the CU forum about the issue of sexism on revleft though, I have been spending some time thinking about these issues lately and your post was just an example of what I've been contemplating. I'm certainly not immune to this type of thinking either and I've been attempting to be highly self critical as well as of late.


My point about the bad and oppressive part wasn't about the Moslem women who wear the clothing. The Moslem women who wear it out of choice don't think it's "bad" or "oppressive" when they choose to wear it, which is good. I'm talking about the people who oppose the clothing, because as you (was it you or someone else?) mentioned the discrimination women face for choosing to wear the burqa, hijab, etc.

Yes you're correct, whether or not someone wants to wear a burqa should ultimately be a personal choice. Given that it is a religious symbol, I think we all agree that in a future socialist society, burqa's will fade into a thing of the past, along with religion, however that doesn't mean that we can just ignore or not develop a coherent stance on an issue which effects millions of working class women across the globe.

Vladimir Innit Lenin
23rd August 2013, 17:48
I'm in two minds. On the one hand, I really hate the attitude of some leftists who, in the name of militant atheism, are happy with anything anti-religion (I seem to remember some on here supporting the Burqa ban in France on such reasoning).

However, on the other hand, it seems slightly hypocritical to criticise on a serious level Lady Gaga for mis-appropriating the Burqa, when countless leftists have been wearing the Keffiyeh in the West for many a year now.

Vladimir Innit Lenin
23rd August 2013, 17:56
This is a more appropriate appropriation of a headscarf:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/tasneemnashrulla/women-in-sweden-wear-headscarves-after-muslim-woman-is-assau

ed miliband
28th August 2013, 18:50
i'm sure a few of you will appreciate knowing that some of the people i saw sharing this article last week have been actively calling for western intervention in syria. they're very concerned when "white saviour syndrome" consists of misinformed rhetoric concerning muslim women in burqas, less so when it manifests itself in, y'know, bombs and shit. this is purely anecdotal though, of course.

i think the basic point, that not all muslim women are victims who need saving should be so obvious as to be banal, but i get uncomfortable when i see this argument somehow transformed into a defense of islam, of the burqa in principle, of shariah law.

in principle i'm utterly against the burqa, of course in practice i realise the implications of that - what campaigns against the burqa represent and so on, as attacks on muslim women. but i think this sorta shit is incredibly questionable:


Muslim women who choose to cover, whether it be a hijab, niqab or burqa, do so in order to avoid the superficial prison built within patriarchal culture where women are only worth their sexual value.

and also, of course islam is inherently patriarchal. same with the other abrahemic religions. the cop out of 'religion is how you interpret it' ignores the fact religions exist in a social context where some interpretations carry much more weight than others. it not very different from the new atheist sorts attacking religion solely by looking at scripture.