January 28, 2017 |
w Syllabus Women’s Rights as Human RightsElizabeth Bullock |
|
January 29, 2017 |
w Rubric for WordPress PostsElizabeth Bullock |
|
January 30, 2017 |
Welcome messageElizabeth Bullock |
Hi everyone,
As I’m sure you know, or will find out shortly, final grades were posted a short while ago. I wanted to tell you again how much I enjoyed our class and your final papers. I attached a few comments directly to your exams in Blackboard, but about midway through this process I began to jot my notes down in a Word document instead because the application in Blackboard became too cumbersome. Or it could be that my computer is too old, I’m not sure. But I’m going to go with Blackboard. In any case, if you are interested in reading my remarks, just let me know. I realize at the end of the semester some of you are ready to move on and that’s fine too.
Best of luck with whatever is next for you and thank you again for a great class.
Elizabeth
Comments are closed.
Hi everyone,
A student has reported that she was unable to upload the final exam to Blackboard when using the Chrome browser. If this happens, login to Blackboard through Firefox instead.
Elizabeth
Hi everyone,
Jacklyn sent an email asking the following question: “I see that we are to have no less than 2,000 words for the 10 page essay. I have over 2,000 words/ 8 pages, is that valid or are you requesting we have an actual 10 page essay?”
I will be counting the number of words for each essay and not the number of pages. If you meet the word count, it doesn’t matter if your essay is under 10 pages.
Elizabeth
Comments are closed.
Hi everyone,
This is just a reminder that the final exam is due this Tuesday, May 23rd, at 9pm. If you have not done so already, please make sure you login to Blackboard ASAP to make sure you have access to the prompt for the exam. The tab “Final Exam” appears in the menu bar on the left; after you click on the tab you will be able to upload your exam to the website. The prompt will be available for a few hours after the due date; however, late exams will incur a penalty (a deduction of a full letter grade). A copy of the rubric for the exam is located under “Resources” on our WordPress site. If you have not done so already, please familiarize yourself with the rubric.
Thanks,
Elizabeth
Thank you, I sent a second submission ID confirmation # 818065842
Again, thank you
Ethel
Hi Amber,
All the readings on the final exam are from our course syllabus.
When you decide which question you will answer, be sure to read the question carefully and choose from the readings that are listed. If you would like to include a reading from our syllabus that is not one of the options listed in the question, you must e-mail in advance for permission.
I hope I’ve answered your questions.
Elizabeth
Hi Toni,
I saw your message which indicated you are having trouble accessing the rubric for the final exam. I believe the problem is on your end (b/c I am able to access the rubric from both of my machines at home.) Let me know if you continue to have this problem, and I’ll send you a copy via e-mail.
-E
The article “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?” by LiMa Abu-Lughod examines the way that individuals visualize the ideal of a “typical” Muslim woman. This ideal that is given to the that hey need the rest of the world to save them, is just simple minded. The stereotype that is given to them always sees them as victims. The idea that these brace and strong woman are t fragile and may sometimes choose to wear burkas simply is mind boggling to them. Muslim woman are accustomed to wearing and covering their traditional religious veils. From societies perspective they’re being oppressed. From other societies perspectives they are being oppressed and not given their human rights. The question is how can we say this without questioning how with our assumptions we are neglecting them from their freedom as humans. They’re human rights are being taken away for the simple fact that other societies are not understanding their culture.
In Lila Abu-Lughod’s essay, “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving? Anthropological Reflections on Cultural Relativism and It’s Others” she gives some insight as to how and why Americans came to relate the burqa, amongst other forms of covering, with the Taliban and other forms of terrorist groups. In addition, she argues whether or not Muslim women really need saving from where they are, or if they chose the life they have and are living out. She starts off by writing that we should consider the meaning if the burqa and other forms of covering , as well as veiling. While reading I have come to learn that women who cover themselves do so in order to show their social and economic standing. Although also for religious reasons, Muslim women have become accustomed to covering themselves because that is the society and community in which they live in.
These women say that only “good women” can wear burqa’s or veils. As a woman who makes a living as a street vendor had said, “If I did [wear the burqa] the refugees would tease me because the burqa is for ‘good women’ who stay inside the home (Fremson 2001:14)” (Abu-Lughod 2002: 786). Here we see that it is actually considered as sort of honor to be able to wear such coverings. However, after the Americans freed people from Taliban control, they assumed the women would no longer cover themselves with scarfs or veils, but were mistaken in thinking that they were being forced to cover themselves. They were not and as Abu-Lughod points out, it is rather that Westerners would have Muslim women adopt Western attire instead of maintaining the attire that they have been used to their whole lives.
Abu-Lughod gave an example of a time when French colonialism existed in Algeria and wished to enlist women’s help in order to move forward with their cause. That cause being that they wished to “… transform Arab women and girls” (Abu-Lughod 2002: 785). The French wanted the Arab women and girls to like the French, Christian women, much like when the British ruled Egypt. This is meant to show that whenever another country went into a Muslim country to “liberate” or “free” them, it doesn’t always bode well for the people who are supposedly meant to be “liberated”. Abu-Lughod implores us to look at the bigger picture, the fact that there are much larger problems to be worried about an need to be dealt with. Rather than wanting these modest Muslim woman to be someone they are not, they need to be left alone so that they may live their lives freely, since that was the initial intention.
Hi Amber,
All the readings on the final exam are from our course syllabus.
When you decide which question you will answer, be sure to read the question carefully and choose from the readings that are listed. If you would like to include a reading from our syllabus that is not one of the options listed in the question, you must e-mail in advance for permission.
I hope I’ve answered your questions.
Elizabeth
Hi Toni,
I saw your message which indicated you are having trouble accessing the rubric for the final exam. I believe the problem is on your end (b/c I am able to access the rubric from both of my machines at home.) Let me know if you continue to have this problem, and I’ll send you a copy via e-mail.
-E
Due Sunday, May 7th, by midnight. Word count: 400 words. Please make sure everything is in your own words. If you paraphrase, make sure to include the proper citation.
If you have missed one or more of our weekly writing assignments, you can make up one assignment this week for full credit.
Due Sunday, April 30th, by midnight. Word count: 400 words. Please make sure everything is in your own words. If you paraphrase, make sure to include the proper citation.
In her essay, “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving,” Lila Abu-Lughod argues that discourses on humanitarianism and human rights in the 21st century rely in some way on constructions of Muslim women. Drawing on details from the text, describe in your own words Lughod’s critique of constructions of veiled women and “vocations of saving others” (2002:789).
Due Sunday, April 23rd, by midnight. Word count: 400 words. Please make sure everything is in your own words. If you paraphrase, make sure to include the proper citation.
In her article, Sally Engle Merry argues that the adoption of a “rights-defined identity” largely depends on an individual’s experiences with the law. Drawing on details from interviews conducted by Merry and her research assistants, explain what you think she means when she says subjectivities are produced through encounters with the legal system.
Due Sunday, April 2nd, by midnight. Word count: 400 words. Please make sure everything is in your own words. If you paraphrase, make sure to include the proper citation.
In their essay, authors Felicity Hill, Mikele Aboitiz, and Sarah Poehlman-Doumbouy describe Resolution 1325 passed by the United Nations Security Council on October 31, 2000. In your own words, describe this resolution as well as its possible implications for the protection of women and girls during times of war.
Due Sunday, March 26th, by midnight. Word count: 400 words. Please make sure everything is in your own words. If you paraphrase, make sure to include the proper citation.
In her work, Ruth Wilson Gilmore argues that the expanding prison population should be connected to a restructuring of the state. In your own words, explain the “crisis” and “surplus” that Gilmore joins to the prison population in the U.S. (of the more than 2 million people living in prisons in 1999).
In light of our discussion last night about the midterm exam, I re-read your posts this morning on Hunt and Moyn.
In assignment 1, many of you focused on the promise of “human rights” that Hunt attributes to documents like the American Declaration of Independence and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen. Others of you cannot move beyond the contradictions of these documents that proclaim equality yet do not address all of humanity. Both of these issues are addressed by Hunt. The midterm asks you to consider the relationship of “human rights” to “the rights of man,” a relationship that is treated differently by Lynn Hunt and Samuel Moyn. To understand Hunt’s argument, I recommend reviewing pages 18-19.
Re-reading your responses to Moyn, for assignment 4, several of you underline his point that “the rights of man” are joined to the creation of states and nations. This is a point that he stresses when he argues that human rights should be distinguished from the Declaration of Independence and the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen. He argues that we must pay attention to the political and economic circumstances surrounding the broader appeal for human rights that emerged in the 1970s. (One place he makes this argument is on page 12. You might also re-read pages 42-43.) Human rights are different from the rights of man, as Moyn explains in conclusion to chapter 1, as they refer to rights that would be placed above the state and nation.
In the chapter we read from her book, Transnational America, Inderpal Grewal begins by underlining that human rights discourse is a relatively new idea: “the only way to address issues of social justice, oppression, and inequality within states and across them” (2005:121). As you consider the relationship of her work to Moyn’s and Hunt’s, I encourage you to re-read pages 123-124 (especially the questions she raises on these pages). Here Grewal considers human rights discourse as a way of understanding relationships among states in a global world. She refers to these relationships as “techniques of governmentality,” a term that signals her view that “human rights” have some positive but also negative implications. I also recommend looking again at pages 126-130. On these pages she notes that the idea of “women’s rights as human rights” gained currency among diverse groups, including the U.S. State Department and rebel groups around the world.
I hope this helps guide you as you begin to prepare for the midterm. Please bring your questions about the exam to class next week or post them on WordPress.
Due Sunday, March 12th, by midnight. Word count: 400 words. Please make sure everything is in your own words. If you paraphrase, make sure to include the proper citation.
In The Caliban and the Witch, Silvia Federici argues that as a social-economic system, capitalism is committed to sexism and racism (2004:17). In your own words, describe the degradation of women that Federici points to in chapter one of her work. How does she connect that degradation to accumulations of wealth in a capitalist political economy?
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3094897/Readings_S17/Midterm_WRHR_3_17.pdf
Due Sunday, March 5th, by midnight. Word count: 400 words. Please make sure everything is in your own words. If you paraphrase, make sure to include the proper citation.
In their work, V. Spike Peterson and Laura Parisi argue that we should interrogate the connection of “human rights” in connection to heterosexism rather than focusing on, as other feminists have, the androcentrism of human rights discourse. In your own words, explain why they believe heterosexism is a more precise way of analyzing the relationship of gender difference and human rights.
Due Sunday, February 26th, by midnight. Word count: 400 words. Please make sure everything is in your own words. If you paraphrase, make sure to include the proper citation.
In chapter one of Samuel Moyn’s work, The Last Utopia: Human Rights in History, he begins to make his argument that “the rights of man,” though a powerful influence on the organization of politics during the nineteenth century, is different from the concept of “human rights” as described in the 1940s and as the concept continues to be used today. In your own words, explain how you think Moyn differentiates these terms: “the rights of man” and “human rights.”
Due Sunday, February 19th, by midnight. Word count: 400 words. Please make sure everything is in your own words. If you paraphrase, make sure to include the proper citation.
In Wendy Brown’s essay, “‘The Most We Can Hope For…’ Human Rights and the Politics of Fatalism,” she argues that human rights activism is more than it claims to be. In your own words, describe some of the evidence Brown provides to support her claim that human rights activism cannot be reduced to “a pure defense of the innocent and powerless” (2004:453). Do you agree with Brown? Why or why not?
Due Sunday, February 12th, by midnight. Word count: 400 words. Please make sure everything is in your own words. If you paraphrase, make sure to include the proper citation.
In The Sexual Contract, Carole Pateman explains that while women have no part in the original contract with civil society described liberal political theorists, they are not left out of the “state of nature.” In your own words, how would you explain the incorporation of women into a sphere that “is and is not in civil society”?
Due Sunday, February 5th, by midnight. Word count: 400 words. Please make sure everything is in your own words. If you paraphrase, make sure to include the proper citation.
1. Write an introductory post that tells the class who you are and about your interest in this class.
2. Then, in about a page, reflect on the following: In the introduction to her book, Inventing Human Rights, Lynn Hunt (2007) draws our attention to some of the legal documents that were precursors to the Universal Declaration for Human Rights adopted by the United Nations in 1948. Choose one of these works and begin to contextualize it in relationship to the framework for human rights that exists today.
January 28, 2017 |
w Syllabus Women’s Rights as Human RightsElizabeth Bullock |
|
January 29, 2017 |
w Rubric for WordPress PostsElizabeth Bullock |
|
January 30, 2017 |
Welcome messageElizabeth Bullock |
3 posts
January 29, 2017 |
w Reading Week 2: Hunt_IntroElizabeth Bullock |
|
January 29, 2017 |
w Reading Week 2: Hunt_Ch3Elizabeth Bullock |
|
January 31, 2017 |
Assignment 01: Rights and Liberalism in 18th Century Europe and the United StatesElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 6, 2017 |
w Rubric for reading presentationElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 8, 2017 |
Bullock-Response to assignment 01Elizabeth Bullock |
5 posts
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 3: PatemanElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 3: WollstonecraftElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 7, 2017 |
Assignment 02: The sexual contractElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 8, 2017 |
What to read for Week 3Elizabeth Bullock |
|
February 15, 2017 |
w Presentation ScheduleElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 18, 2017 |
Bullock-Response to assignment 02Elizabeth Bullock |
6 posts
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 4: The Universal Declaration of Human RightsElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 4: Declaration of Sentiments and ResolutionsElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 4: BrownElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 3: WollstonecraftElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 14, 2017 |
Assignment 03: The politics of fatalismElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 15, 2017 |
w Presentation ScheduleElizabeth Bullock |
6 posts
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 5: What are Human Rights?Elizabeth Bullock |
|
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 5: RancièreElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 15, 2017 |
w Reading Week 5: MoynElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 21, 2017 |
Assignment 04: The Last UtopiaElizabeth Bullock |
|
March 4, 2017 |
Bullock-response to assignment 04Elizabeth Bullock |
5 posts
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 6: Spike and ParisiElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 6: GrewalElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 28, 2017 |
Assignment 05: Heterosexism and rightsElizabeth Bullock |
3 posts
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 7: FredericiElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 7: MarxElizabeth Bullock |
|
March 8, 2017 |
Assignment 06Elizabeth Bullock |
3 posts
March 5, 2017 |
w Midterm RubricElizabeth Bullock |
|
March 7, 2017 |
w Midterm examElizabeth Bullock |
|
March 8, 2017 |
Bullock-on assignment 05 and the midtermElizabeth Bullock |
|
March 12, 2017 |
w Midterm–Sample of Student WorkElizabeth Bullock |
|
March 15, 2017 |
MidtermElizabeth Bullock |
1 b |
March 16, 2017 |
Midterm-question about notesElizabeth Bullock |
6 posts
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 9: KandaswamyElizabeth Bullock |
|
March 21, 2017 |
w Reading Week 9: Foucault (optional)Elizabeth Bullock |
|
March 21, 2017 |
w Reading Week 9: GilmoreElizabeth Bullock |
|
March 21, 2017 |
w Reading Week 9: McLennanElizabeth Bullock |
|
March 21, 2017 |
Assignment 07: human rights and the lawElizabeth Bullock |
|
March 25, 2017 |
On Tuesday…Elizabeth Bullock |
6 posts
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 10: AlvarezElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 10: Hill, Aboitiz and Poehlman-DoumbouyaElizabeth Bullock |
|
March 28, 2017 |
Assignment 08: Resolution 1325Elizabeth Bullock |
3 posts
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 13: MerryElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 13: VisweswaranElizabeth Bullock |
|
April 7, 2017 |
Assignment 09: A “rights-defined identity”Elizabeth Bullock |
3 posts
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 14: Abu-LughodElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 14: OngElizabeth Bullock |
|
April 25, 2017 |
Assignment 10: constructions of Muslim women and saving “others”Elizabeth Bullock |
3 posts
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 15: CabezasElizabeth Bullock |
|
February 2, 2017 |
w Reading Week 15: BernsteinElizabeth Bullock |
|
May 2, 2017 |
Assignment 11: make-up an assignmentElizabeth Bullock |
|
May 8, 2017 |
w Final Exam–RubricElizabeth Bullock |
|
May 8, 2017 |
w Final Exam–RevisedElizabeth Bullock |
1 b |
5 posts
Hi everyone,
As I’m sure you know, or will find out shortly, final grades were posted a short while ago. I wanted to tell you again how much I enjoyed our class and your final papers. I attached a few comments directly to your exams in Blackboard, but about midway through this process I began to jot my notes down in a Word document instead because the application in Blackboard became too cumbersome. Or it could be that my computer is too old, I’m not sure. But I’m going to go with Blackboard. In any case, if you are interested in reading my remarks, just let me know. I realize at the end of the semester some of you are ready to move on and that’s fine too.
Best of luck with whatever is next for you and thank you again for a great class.
Elizabeth
The article “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?” by LiMa Abu-Lughod examines the way that individuals visualize the ideal of a “typical” Muslim woman. This ideal that is given to the that hey need the rest of the world to save them, is just simple minded. The stereotype that is given to them always sees them as victims. The idea that these brace and strong woman are t fragile and may sometimes choose to wear burkas simply is mind boggling to them. Muslim woman are accustomed to wearing and covering their traditional religious veils. From societies perspective they’re being oppressed. From other societies perspectives they are being oppressed and not given their human rights. The question is how can we say this without questioning how with our assumptions we are neglecting them from their freedom as humans. They’re human rights are being taken away for the simple fact that other societies are not understanding their culture.
Lila Abu-Lughod examines the justifications for the “War on Terrorism” launched by the US post-9/11 in her compelling and well-argued piece, “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving? Anthropological Reflections on Cultural Relativism and its Others.” She begins by refuting the notion that the US military bombing of Afghanistan had anything to do with bringing liberation to women supposedly oppressed by their culture – despite the overwhelming narrative led by Western women in powerful positions proclaiming feminist motivations for the devastating attack on one of the world’s poorest countries. Indeed, Abu-Lughod makes a strong case that the discussion about “culture” actually works to mask a real discussion about the political objectives and the long history of US support for some of the most egregious and brutal regimes throughout the region.
Abu-Lughod also shows that this western obsession with Muslim women, in particular, isn’t new and has served in the past as justification for earlier western intervention in the region, as was the case with England into Egypt. The rhetoric of saving women and the championing of women’s rights is old hat for the west when those in power seek colonial domination. The point is to portray Muslim women as one-dimensional, sad figures who need someone else – someone who knows what they want and need better than they do – to save them from the men who oppress them who supposedly force them into wearing veils. The hope is that people don’t ask how exactly bombing their country can help women achieve any kind of liberation. And that people will accept the caricatures of the liberated western woman vs. the enslaved eastern woman.
A long-standing myth that Abu-Lughod’s critique helps to destroy is the notion that wearing a veil is the reflection of some form of oppression. Aside from going through the myriad reasons that different women wear different kinds of veils – history, social class, region, religious affiliations – she also reminds western readers that there are all kinds of cultural norms when it comes to how people dress in different parts of the west that nobody would ever think to question. Why then is there a different standard for Muslim women?
Abu-Lughod’s piece underscores the importance of questioning the motivations of the US (and other governments) when “culture” is used as an explanation for military intervention. Rather, we should look at the historical relationship of our own government in the region and understand that all people have the capacity for self-determination. That is, “we” do not know what is “best” for everyone else, and we certainly cannot dictate the way that people in different countries with different histories should express their own freedom.
Before the Resolution 1325 women’s issues weren’t integrated in the council’s activities and also the council never recognized the women’s roles of “agents of space”. After Resolution 1325, women became equal participants in negotiation, and women and girls were able to be protected during armed conflicts. Resolution 1325 was used by women and peace groups throughout the world. Since the Resolution 1325, women’s organizations occurred, NGO produced documents monitoring of its implementation, and the Inter- Agency Taskforce on Women, peace and security at the UN has coordinated a system-wide implementation strategy. It ensures that women groups receive concrete financial and technical support and a result of the Resolution 1325 there was a high demand for women to be included in decision making, and woman have been included in the discussion about reconstruction of Afghanistan and in the Inter- Congolese Dialogue. In October 2001, the Security Council reaffirmed its strong support for for increasing women’s role in decision making with regard to conflict prevention and resolution. Also, women were allowed to be a part of peace accords, constitutions, and strategies for resettlement and rebuilding. Before Resolution 1325, women weren’t even thought about or considered doing anything important in their community but as soon as Resolution 1325 was passed women were able to do more than just be in the background. They were now able to make decisions, have and voice their opinions. “On March 8, 2011, IA’s Women Building Peace campaign handed Specil Advisor Angela King more than 100,000 signatures from more that 140 countries, from women, women’s organizations, and civil society groups working for peace and social justice, in support of women’s demand for protection, participation in decision making, and an end to impunity for crimes committed to women.” Crimes committed towards women sometimes to most of the time go without justification and just because they are women is one of the reasons as to why they go without justification. I under sat and why women would sign something that could and will give them a further foot up in the world and would allow them to have their rights that they deserve and that are supposed to be their natural rights. In 2002 working group members held 12 events to bring attention to Resolution 1325. More than 100 people advocate and implement the resolution. They also organized International Women’s Day which gets a lot of attention. Thanks to Resolution 1325 women are now and have been for a while to have a say and their own opinion and much more in modern day society.
As Lughod (2002) analyzes, world events led to the marginalization of Muslim women and upheaved a movement and concentrated on religion being ostracized and discriminated against. Previous to September 11th, the majority of Americans were on amicable terms with the Middle East, despite several conflicts and the Persian Gulf war. However, thanks to the American tragedy, Americans began to gravitate and look at the religion as a whole, to pinpoint the exact “cause” of 9/11. The result was objection and judgement towards women who practiced Islam, without regards to their insistence and own opinions, which ironically, is just as violating as the assumption that Muslim men disregard their opinion.
A catalyst in this argument was Laura Bush, who wanted to support her husband and his war endeavors to Afghanistan. Understandably so, Laura wanted to discuss the culture of the nationality that reportedly killed Americans on the tragic day. Within her research, she perceived the women in the situation to being trapped within their homes, and believed Americans invading the territory could liberate housewives and other women from their second class citizenship (Lughod, 2002, 874). Though it can be understandable to think of a terrorist’s wife being in this position, the vast majority of Muslim women are given freedom, and their freedom entails with following their religious orders and text.
As discussed by Lughod, it is quite comical to think that the Taliban “invented” the burqa, when in reality, it is a custom in several of the stricter Islamic nations. For these particular sects, the burqa gives the woman the most modesty (Lughod, 2002, 876). Some might find this offensive, but the same can be said about the chastity of nuns in Roman Catholic culture. While some would assume American influence in extremist parts of the Middle East might loosen customs, it should also be realized that for many, this is a preferred method, though others see it otherwise.
Another interesting reference is how the modesty clauses of Muslim women have become “fashion trends”, though their reasoning is purely out of respect for their religion. While many Westernized people and culture might find a Muslim woman’s outfit trendy when it does not involve a burqa or hijab, the purpose of this outfit is still to appease Allah (Lughod, 2002, 878). In a sense, Western culture fetishizes Eastern cultures, but then disregards the contexts from the culture, resulting in cultural appropriation. Along with this, there is a superiority complex, though all religions have factions that commit the same offenses.
The Resolution 1325 was implemented and unanimously passed on October 31, 2000 This took place in Namibia, the Security Council let more then forty speakers talk about women, peace and security. The Resolution 1325 has been used, quoted by constituency of women and peace groups all over the world. The UN system made three aspects for the Resolution 1325. First the ideas and language dating back to other documents, treaties passed through the UN since 1945. The second part was international, popular with historic information and analysis. The third the unity of the Namibian presidency of the Security council, DAW, UNIFEM and NGO all played an important role in helping identify and the experiences from women.
The Women and Armed Conflict Caucus made several recommendations to the Security Council, the requirements for the protection of women and girls in armed conflict, increase women participation of all ages in conflict prevention, appoint someone on gender issues to the Security Council,employ a wider range of non violent conflict prevention, UN will provide on going training in gender and cultural sensitivity, implementing procedures for drawing on the experiences of women.
As of October 31, 2000 the Resolution 1325 was in placed and it’s tasks implemented to ensure that women’s groups receive concrete, practical financial and technical support. Since its passing the UN states it has peacekeeping in several countries of the Middle East and Africa. At times the information has been limited to the Security Council. But the change has come for women to be included in decision making, peace talking and security . After the US went to war with Afghanistan, the meeting with NGO was important because of the limited role women had in this country. The Security Council reenforce the importance of the strong support for women’s role in decision making with conflict and prevention. The Security wanted the number of women to increase and wanted women nominated and fill in as special representatives. The UN mission was to have women and girls in matter of pease and security.
The Resolution 1325 must continue to be used into action. The Un must ensure that women in all levels of pease and security be present. This change is moving forward slowly. Back in 2000, women where able to squeeze into the Security Council and debate for the very first time. Moving forward the Resolution 1325 must continue to make change and stay permanently open for women and girls human rights. Many women continue to fight for the protection of theirs lives.
As Lughod begins pointing out quite early in her piece, the entire approach towards Muslim women, particularly in Afghanistan post-9/11 wasn’t coming from an appropriate place. Mainstream US media doesn’t often stop to examine the women of a group (be it cultural, religious, geographic etcetera) unless the examination is fueled by some ethnocentric bias, or the examination is being put into media spaces by the government to help better serve their point. A misunderstanding of Islam was all that could be hoped for by shallow reporting on the way Muslim women live, of course by the light of US standards Muslim women seemed to be oppressed. Lughod points out that religious and cultural differences were being scapegoated as causes of terrorism, while mainstream US media ignored long-simmering political issues. Regardless of if a true study of Islam does or doesn’t bring up women’s rights issues, the Western narrative was create a narrative of oppressed Muslim women to justify a war in a Muslim region. Lughod points to the language used in Laura Bush’s speech that worked to not only divide the East and the West but to blur lines along issues women in Afghanistan were facing, again ignoring historical issues by pretending that malnutrition was an issue that had begun with terrorism (pg. 784). Laura Bush was trying to equate women’s rights with the war on terrorism, while her husband wasn’t equating women’s right’s with human rights, as we do in our class. Western history is full of stories of white men in power using women’s issues (real or constructed) to justify their own actions, actions that are usually damaging and undertaken with some other true purpose.
One of the major issues with Western constructions of Muslim female identities, and the meaning of veils and burqa’s is that it’s commonly assumed that burqa’s are something the Taliban imposed to oppress women, when actually it is a part of their religion. If wearing a veil was something we had grown up with within our culture we wouldn’t think twice about it. In debates about burqa’s and the uncomfortable heat I always think of the Hassidic Jewish men I see in Brooklyn – I sincerely doubt they enjoy being in full pants, long sleeved shirts, coats and hats in the middle of the New York summer, but no one calls their dress a sign of oppression. I really loved Lughod’s conclusion about forgetting all this vocational saving and veil debating and focusing on working against true and global injustice.
In “The Sexual Contract”, Carole Pateman discusses how women are excluded from the social contract. Pateman is not referring to contract law nor does she refer to property in the literal sense. Rather she refers to the social contract in which authority is granted to state and civil law and property in the sense of personhood. Meaning, the system in which we surrender some natural rights in order to live and participate in a civil society and to have our political rights protected. From the social contract, we have social relationships, including the relationship between husband and wife (the marriage contract) and employer and employee (the employment contract). We are taught that these freedoms and protections are universal in a civil society, however due to society’s patriarchal structure, women are excluded.
When Pateman refers to patriarchy, she is not referring to the literal definition of paternal rule. Rather, she refers to society where women are subordinate to men not as fathers and husbands but simply due to the fact that men are men. In the patriarchal society, men have the freedom to move between the private and public sphere freely, to fully engage in the social contract, the marriage contract, the employment contract, the prostitution contract. Women are not. They are largely relegated to the private sphere, which is viewed as apolitical. As a result, their rights, particularly in such contracts as the marriage contract, are almost nonexistent. This results in further subjugation and a furthering of a patriarchal society.
While the public sphere is the only sphere as existing in a political sense, the sphere which benefits from the civil law, freedom, and equality brought about through the social contract, the public sphere and the private sphere cannot exist without one another. Just as ‘natural’ and ‘civil’ depend on one another for their existence, yet remain in opposition to one another, so do the private and public sphere. Because women exist in the private sphere rather than the public sphere, they are excluded from the social contract. However, they are not (and cannot) be excluded from the sexual contract. They are not equals in the sexual contract though. Their exclusion from the social contract results in a subordinate position within the sexual contract. To maintain this separation and subjugation, the public/civil sphere is viewed through a masculine lens, while the private/natural sphere is viewed through a feminine lens. Again, this furthers patriarchal rule and leaves women existing in a space that both is and is not political, enforcing subjugation and oppression.
In the “Caliban and the witch” Siliva Frederici investigates the transition from federalism to capitalism. This had a major impact on women. Women could not afford living status because the land was being privatized. This transition to capitalism degraded women and it allowed the men to have full control.
Women didn’t work the land for long, they worked more inside the home. Women were a major part of producing children. They couldn’t abort any pregnancies or take any form of birth control, if they did then they would be committing a crime. Women worked to reproduce the next generation of workers. They forced to reproduce and take care of their husbands needs and to take care of the house. This in not really work it’s just wifely duties.
Women were not respected in the waged labor Felid because they were denied entrance. The money that she did make was not enough for her to survive off of. This led women to the lower class. This made women vulnerable and defendant on men. They were seen as some sort of breeding machine.
Maria Libreros
Prof. Elizabeth Bullock Human Rights 31154 Feb 19,2017
Assig # 3
“The politics of fatalism” By: Wendy Brown
It is clear that Wendy Brown in “The Most We Can Hope For Human Rights and Politics Fatalism” is interested in “ the pure defence of the innocent and powerless against power’, she argues that the human rights are contradicting because, on one hand they advocate for the rights of powerless, and for the defense of innocents, on other hand it has significant ways of power that The Human Rights is presented not only political but moral.
Brown also arguments that human rights are not only to solve problems against of power but, they also needs to be defended against their own power as she observed. She believed that human rights is a monopoly that organizes a political space. For example, in The Human Rights and The Politics of Fatalism, Brown explains that Human Rights is doing is to protect the rights of every individuals by condemning the abuses and alleviate or minimize suffering, but it did not provide details of the reasons that produce such abuse and or why a situation happens. However, if we don not understand how the violations of rights happens and why it happens, and where then we are unable to comprehend what we can do for, or how to stop or prevent that situation to be repeated in the future.
Brown agree with Ignatieff in that human rights can not be reduced to a pure defense of the innocent and powerless, what she means is that human rights and the state most emphasise in
the right of the individuo such as independent of culture, religion, beliefs, language and even more if human rights can appeal for hope then human rights can provide or enjoy an universal support as one intercultural and moral world. We should hope for a better world instead of created political, religious, racial, and so on conflicts that are the major contributors to human rights violations. It also contribute to human rights inequality, or how come an individual is treated in different way? Powerless? Again, Ignatieff and Brown points out that human rights should not focus only in political problems when there is people around the world who needs to be supported with dignity. I believe that in human rights we have still a long way to go in order for everyone worldwide to have the basic rights as human been, the right of shelter, food, and ever worse the right to have potable water supply.
The United States feminist organization discourse on humanitarian and human rights in Taliban clearly secured women’s safety. At the same time, the U.S. encompassed an oil deal with the Taliban. Obviously, the political relations between the two countries unveiled a significant emergence toward obtaining power. Both the U.S and the Taliban complicity concealed a relationship. This brings to my mind, suspicion. The development of a major capitalist project. The two countries were arranging a relationship that would have had a long history of interaction. An oil pipeline in Taliban. The shock to the conscience is in one setting the U.S. is approaching the Taliban with a negotiated deal yet on another setting the U.S. is systematically struggling for human rights and dignity for woman. What hypocrisy! The feminist organizations continuously advocated to protect the women. They fought vehemently for human rights for women. They persistently advocated for women’s freedom. This support for women occurred in multiple fashions. In accordance to Lila Abu-Lughod in Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving? “She stated, [although we struggled for women to thrive and live decently] we must accept the possibility of difference…Taliban women might want different things than what we might want for them”. In other words, the U.S cannot always expect to shape the ideas of oppressed women. We cannot totally disrupt a culture and moral principle because the Western organizations considered themselves rescuers. America cannot ideally reshape Taliban women’s identity in exchange for a women’s freedom. The U.S closely linked Taliban women’s independence to stripping away the Burgas. They portrayed the unveiling of women as symbolic to autonomy. They described the Taliban culture as an alien culture. The U.S deemed themselves as the savior for Taliban women. Their discourse was extremely bias. Now I do not critique the feminist campaigns that was truly instrumental in bringing awareness to the suffering of Taliban women. Although some organizations successfully empowered many Taliban women they were unsuccessful in transforming all women through their intellectual dialogue. I find it questionable any women would have separated from their culture and moral principles. The deep-rooted interrelationship among Taliban women, men, family and religion not to mention culture and moral principle was interlaced. The U.S. attitude and behavior echoed a broader message. The created a reshaping in 11the women’s values. For instance, to remove the Burgas from Taliban women was symbolic in removing any memory of their past. Also, the Burgas represented importance in a women’s life. The disruption in the Taliban’s cultural and moral principle was troublesome. So, America’s intrusion in Taliban life quickly proved an inception of colonization which was not what Taliban women desired.
“We do not stand outside the world, looking out over this sea of poor benighted people, living under the shadow – or veil- of oppressive cultures; we are part of the world. Islamic movements themselves have arisen in a world shaped by the intense engagements o the Western powers in the Middle Eastern lives” (p.789). Lila Abu-Lughod examines the religious practices of Muslim women in Afghanistan, and the western beliefs that’s Muslim women are controlled by the Taliban (Muslim men). Lila Abu-Lughod talks about the US involvement in Afghanistan targeting the aftermath of 9/11, she talks about Laura Bush’s speech on Muslim women and how the US saved women from the unjust practices of the Taliban. Bush claims that the US interference in Afghanistan helped women and allowed them to “properly’ part take in the community, “white men saving brown women from brown men” (p.384).
Lila Abu-Lughod also highlights that the Taliban did not invent the burqa, “It was the local form of covering that The Pashtun women in one region wore when they went out. The Pashtun are one of the several ethnic groups in Afghanistan and the burqa was one of the many forms of covering in the subcontinent and Southwest Asia” (785). Why doesn’t Americans worry about other religions that use cover ups for women, such as Jewish women and men, I live in area in Brooklyn were there are lots of Hasidic Jews and like in the article I’m sure they don’t ‘enjoy’ wearing long sleeves and pants during a heat wave but they do because it is part of their religion. Lila Abu-Lughod also argues that women were being forced to wear burqa’s, but even after Afghanistan was liberated from the control of the Taliban women continued to cover up. Its interesting and questionable why America is obsessed with Muslim practices, particularly Muslim women. It also seems that Westerners are forcing and encouraging heterosexual norms upon Muslim countries and while doing so US coins themselves as heroic. The veiling of the Muslim women is in fact a choice and a belief that Muslim women follow; they are not being forced to wear a burqa. Instead of focusing on Muslim women and practices Lila Abu-Lughod suggests how we as a nation can make the world better. How we should stop trying to understand and change cultural practices, and realize that it may cause greater harm then good in doing so.
Lila Abu-Lughod is discussing how the ideas of human rights and humanitarian efforts are in essence being forced on women of other cultures particularly those from Muslim countries. She is explaining how there is no real respect or understanding of differences among cultures and histories and that Muslim women are not realized as individual persons with different notions of freedom and justice.
Abu-Lughod is trying to understand why the US is focused so much on cultural and religious beliefs of certain cultures but particularly the religious and cultural beliefs of Afghan women and using the Burqa or veil as a symbol of oppression as well as a tool to justify military interventions by the US in certain regions of the world. She argues that the western views of human rights does not address the injustices faced by women in Muslim countries( education, poverty and health concerns) including the affects of war but instead are a site of cultural generalization where region, community membership and class are not taken into consideration. Wearing a veil, burqa or hijab signifies community membership modesty and respectability. She makes an interesting point regarding the Jewish community and how women wear wigs which is a part of their “religious belief and community standards of propriety require the covering of the hair” (Abu-Lughod, 2002, p. 785). The wearing of burqas also signifies the difference between the public and the private realm in Muslim countries. These distinctions are a part of their culture and are a mark of modesty. Overall I think the veils have more to do with identity and inclusion in one’s own community as opposed to oppression or lack of agency.
The call to saving others has very little to do with human rights or justice or safety for the women in Muslim countries it has more to do with the US and other powerful countries imposing its values, beliefs and morals on other nations. The western view of liberation does not necessarily align with the views of women in Muslim countries, “they may want different things than we would want for them” (Abu-Lughod, 2002, p. 787). Again the vocations of saving others implies that the “other” ,Muslim women, need to be rescued. But it is really the West trying to gain control of many Arab countries based on “oil interests, the arms industry, and the international drug trade” (Abu-Lughod, 2002, p. 789).
Muslim countries have long resisted attempts by the west to impose their ideas of how to live and dress starting with the 19th century Christian missionaries. The west wants to impose its way of life on these countries especially its religious beliefs. Culture is closely tied to religion in Muslim countries and they hold on to the practices and rituals that are a central part of their culture and way of life.
The use of negative associations between terrorists , the Taliban and the injustices women face in South Asia by the west work to divide nations and cultures by implying that Afghanistan is an uncivilized country and the women are “victims” of the Taliban. But at the same time the west omits its role in the injustices that impact the lives of women from Muslim countries.
Women in Muslim countries are not forced to wear veils or burqas they wear what is considered appropriate based on where in the region they live, their status (professional, poor or working class, marital status, etc) and to community standards.
Abu-Lughod, L. (2002, September). Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving? Anthropological Reflections on Cultural Relativism and Its Others. American Anthropologist, 104(3), 783-790.
The conduction of Merry’s research along with her assistants in the article “Rights Talk and the Experience of Law: Implementing Women’s Human Rights to Protection from Violence” points out that women are placed in a domain where personal feelings of the law (executed by mainly men) are interfering with how women should be fully protected by their rights. It should not be a matter of the law having conditions, whether the victim should or not be defended, and as well the aggressor whether persecuted to full extent of the law or place it as a slap on the wrist.
The author terminated a close attention in how the representatives executing the law, view women, specifically in the situation as described as battered women, as being good victims and bad victims. Such informal titles used to categorize women across the board, clearly enables those who are applying the rules of the government to view the people in need of the law with a bias and subjectively. The method of which battered women have been victimized has established a number of individuals to collectively band in an effort to better support women of whom been victims of domestic violence. The activist not only place their supportive effort in educating them of what their legal right is as a woman, but also contribute in promoting enhancing skills where the couples can mutually find a common ground and acquire a preferred safe relationship.
Needless to say, the matter of the state, community and family members, interfere over-proportionately in private circumstantial affairs of couples’ relationship. A detriment set onto women, that if by having a situation that could lead them to a bad experience for enabling their right to defend themselves under the supposedly fair judicial law, then such act of pinpointing the problem becomes to women a much greater concern. That’s why it is important the emphasizes of such community outreach programs that can provided support in dire situations for women who have become victims of domestic violence. Not only should such programs that aide women in times of violent moments be viewed as supplemental establishments, but as necessary means of combating the privatized enclosed torture that women are encountering on a day by day basis. That the publicization of domestic violence towards women, be there in bringing out the issue at which women who also attribute in such cases in being unwilling participants by their male partner, lead to a transparency of awareness for all women and not selectively held as a mockery for women to just bear with it.
In the article “Rights Talk and the Experience of Law: implementing Women’s human Rights to protection from Violence” by Sally Engle Merry She mentions how import is for a woman to take action if they are abused by her husbands.
At the beginning of the article, she made as familiarize in the topic of women against violence. As she mentioned a movement called “Battered women” was created to help women to find help if they were abused by their husbands.
Merry Interviewed thirty women about domestic violence, every story was different but with the same domestic violence in their lives. During the interview twelve women were in court for the first time, Some of them feel fear and anxiety about turning to the courts for the first time but they also feel supported in some ways. They also expressed how for them took a long time to decide to go to court and when finally they went most of the time they felt fear in court and the angry face of their husbands.In other cases, women were forced to drop off charges because they didn’t want their husbands going to jail. I believe most of the time men try to put all the fault on women making them believe they are guilty.
The essay also mentions for example in Hilo, cultural patterns justify violence in some cases because men were thinking women deserved that violence. “Men typically defend their violence as justified by the woman’s sexual activities or her failure to care for their children” (Pg.368)
From my point of view, Merry is showing us in this essay how men more of the time were having more support by the law in contrast to the women. I believe this was the reason why most of the women preferred to keep quiet and don’t tell about the abuse they were having by her husbands o partners. Women didn’t believe they were going to be protected by the law.
I believe this is happening these days because not all women get the protection they deserve, and some of them can be controlled by their own husbands to continue in the same domestic violence. Some women don’t say a word about their domestic violence and sometimes family or neighbor are the ones who claim something is happening. I know women who didn’t do anything until her husband hit his own child and send him to the hospital.
In chapter one of Samuel Myon’s, “The Last Utopia”, and Myon explains how human rights differ from the rights of man.
Going just off of chapter one alone isn’t enough to fully understand what and how human rights differ from the rights of man. From what I understood, human rights are a transition in a social society. What continues to puzzle me as we discuss the foundations of human rights is how much religion played a part in defining those rights. Thinking about what the “religion” should represent, how can then have rights, while still excluding some of your citizens? You have philosophers, theorist, and clergy that believe “rights of man” are unfair, yet the clergy didn’t take into consideration slaves, woman, or non-property owners. In my opinion, based on the text, human rights were created to protect citizens that were excluded from traditional rights of man. I feel since I have only read the first chapter, there are a lot of things that may have been explained later that I have missed. Myon doesn’t clearly define what human rights are, nor does it clearly define what the rights of man are. To me the difference between the rights of man and human rights are the purpose and the individuals it serves, and time. The rights of man come from the revolutionary era during a time when men felt entitled, and privilege to things that others were not. For example, because I am a property owner and you’re not, I am entitled to have certain necessities and resources that you are not because you don’t own property. Human rights are people standing up against this entitlement and privilege and saying we are all humans and should all have access. In today’s society I feel we still have what can be considered the “rights of man” and then “human rights”. In modern time our government regulates human rights and we laws to “protect” against it. At the same time, we still have people show execute their “rights of men”, and feel certain types of people shouldn’t have the same rights as them because of race, religion, gender and the list goes on. The dilemma is now, what do you do when the government as chosen to execute their “rights of men”?
In Human Rights Fifty Years on: A Reappraisal by Tony Evans, there is a piece in this work written by V. Spike Peterson and Laura Parisi titled “Are Women Human? It’s not an academic question.” In this piece V. Spike Peterson and Laura Parisi speak about heterosexism, androcentrism and its relationship to women’s rights and human rights. Heterosexism is defined as the “normal sexual orientation”, a sexual relationship between a man and a woman. Androcentrism is defined as main “focus or center on man.” In this piece feminist argue that men or part of humen rights and women are part of “other” rights, women are not seen as human, so they are under represented and devalued when it comes to Human rights. Both V. Spike Peterson and Laura Parisi feel differently from other feminist because, they feel human rights should be linked to heterosexism rather than focus on the relationship between the domination of men have with human rights. All throughout history men have dominated and/or been the center of focus when it comes to rights that are created and given and women have always been an after thought. Feminist today try to separate the men from the women when speaking of human rights. V. Spike Peterson and Laura Parisi speak of two spheres. There is the private/family sphere and the public/state sphere. The private sphere embodies women and children, the public sphere is designated for men. These spheres further divide men and women. Human rights were created by men for men, they do not address the rights of women. Human rights are not really the rights of women. These spheres further enforce the separation between men and women by keeping them apart. Too look at just women’s rights or the lack that there was of women’s rights we begin to see just how hidden their rights have become. Keeping them in a private/family sphere and/or realm separates them from the public and/or state. They were seen as property. Using heterosexisum allows women to be seen with men when addressing human rights because it connects them. Heterosexisum leads to reproduction, which leads to family. Family is a “natural gender binary.” It’s composed of two things and those two things are men and women. Just like most things heterosexisum is seen to have more privileges for men than women. The masculinity of men takes strong hold over the femininity of women leaving the two genders separated.
In the article “Do Women Really Need Saving? Anthropological Reflections on Cultural Relativism and its Others”, by Lila Abu-Lughod, the author talks about anthropology and tries to explain the reasons why America intervened in Afghanistan with the intention of saving women. She also focuses primarily on cultural differences between women in the world and her goal is to develop an appreciation of it because it has a meaning and is the product of a history that has been changing over the time. The author advocates for an exploration of the roots and nature of Afghan women, their culture rather than a political and historic view. She studies what is the significance of Afghan women wearing a veil, it is because they are forced to wear it as a sign of oppression, or it has a deep personal meaning. First, It was believed that Afghan women living under the Taliban and the terrorist rule were forced to wear a burqa, however, now they are no longer under the Taliban rule and continue wearing burqas. Lila Abu-Lughod explains that Southwest Asia has developed the thought that covering up with a burqa symbolizes modesty and respectability. She cites the anthropologist Hanna Papanek who described the burqa as “portable seclusion” because it allows women to move out of segregated spaces as well as separating them from unknown men. It also maintains women’s sanctity according to the ideas of the author.
“People wear the appropriate form of dress for their social communities and are guided by socially shared standards, religious beliefs, and moral ideas” (Abu-Lughod, 785), unlike Afghan women who choose to wear the covering style because it signifies respectable class and it was imposed by the Taliban as religiously appropriate. Even if they are liberated from the Taliban and the imposition of wearing burqas, not only afghan women but also Hindu women, women from Malaysia, Pakistan or muslims women would still find a modest clothing to wear because good respectable women from strong families wear burqas and in addition, wearing a burqa is thought to mean bodily virtue that takes women closer to God (786).
The author points out clearly that she do not support the oppression of women. She advocates for the human rights and especially women’s rights of afghan women that for her should be universal human rights such as the right to freedom from violence of global inequality and war. However, even when afghan women are liberated from oppression, people should respect and appreciate their differences, not always what we want is the best, a sense of respect for their culture the author draws attention to.
In the essay of “Do Muslim Women Really Need saving? ” by Lila Abu-Lughod, she points out many factors of the ideas and focuses of what the westerns views and obsesses when it comes to helping Muslim women, she first points out that why do we now have concerns after the events and aftermath of September 11, 2001. Abu-Lughod suggest that one should be skeptical about the focus on the “muslim women” if it begins with the U.S public response. Abu-Lughod is concerned with the views of reporters or modern western feminist, that show they are more focused on the basic issue on women from Afghanistan, the terrible encounters with the Taliban’s or why was they understanding of “culture” of the region and its religious belief and treatment of women was more important than exploring the history of the development of oppression regimes/government in the region and the U.S role in the history of muslim women. Abu-Lughod also points out ‘haunting’ words from the First Lady Laura Bush’s radio would state that towards the issue on the “War on Terrorism” that “Because of our recent military gains in much of Afghanistan, women are no longer imprisoned to their homes. They can listen to music and teach their daughter without fear of punishment. The fight against terrorism is also a fight for their rights and dignity of women” (U.S Government 2002) (2002:784). Abu-Lughod would point out on the politics of the view that since Laura’s Bush would freely say that Afghanistan woman claim their rejoice of liberation, that it was known that the burqa was a sign of oppression on Afghan under the Taliban the women were forced to ear them. But liberals would confess that even after Afghanistan women were liberated from the Taliban, they still wore their burqa, In reality Pashtun one of the several ethnic group in Afghanistan was where the women would wear them when they were outside. The burqa symbolized separation of men and women sphere from the public, an association of women with the family and home wore when outside-where strangers mingled. The burqa would symbolized women who were modest but Aba-Lughod would question why would women become ‘immodest’ if they suddenly did not where their burqa or any form of cover up, which supposedly assured them protection of harassment. Another critique and one of the most important thing is that especially since it has little focus to is that she believes that Afghanistan women should have the right to freedom from violence, global inequality from the ravages of war, enough food to eat, having homes, for their families, make a decent living, education, medicine and so on.
Lila Abu-Lughod makes it clear in her abstract that reification of culture, or wanting to make cultural and religious practices by Muslim women especially practical and concrete, is problematic in the sense that it’s an objectification. In other words, over-analyzing and incorporating politics ultimately strips cultural complex practices of its value and significance and places judgement on it, as if it is a tangible thing, relating it to rights and liberty, and whether their practices are interfering or almost victimizing these women and their socially and politically aligned entitlements.
One quote that stuck out to me during Abu-Lughod’s mention of her interviews in the U.S, with acknowledgement of constructions of Islam in relation to broadcasted politics, is “as if knowing something about women and Islam or the meaning of a religious ritual would help one understand the tragic attack on New York’s World Trade Center and the U.S. Pentagon, or how Afghanistan had come to be ruled by the Taliban, or what interests might have fueled US,” (p. 785). This quote is truly significant when attempting to unravel Abu-Lughod’s critique on constructions of Muslim women and “vocations of saving others” due to the evidence of these interview questions specifically indicating assumptions of a potential internal crisis within Islam that may be a result of tragic attacks or terrorist acts.
Contributing to more shocking news, in Laura Bush’s speech, bombings in Afghanistan, supported by neat cultural icons: “rejoiced” Afghan/Muslim women speakers, were portrayed as assistant in liberating women from their households, which simultaneously served as supposed imprisonment under the Taliban reign, and allowing them to have simple pleasures, like listening to music. Without shedding clarity on “separate causes in Afghanistan of women’s continuing malnutrition, poverty, and ill health,” (p. 784) within the speech, the Taliban, or “terrorist” control was emphasized in a greater negative perception in association with Islam and Muslim women who need saving.
Another misconception of the Taliban and terrorist reign and women’s oppression is that women were forced to wear veils, or hijabs. Due to their religion, ethnic groups, and due to the local form of covering that went on before and after the Taliban were present, it is clear that their apparel was a result of their own free choice and is a result of complex socio-cultural practices of modesty, not necessarily oppression. “If we think that U.S. women live in a world of choice regarding clothing, all we need to do is remind ourselves of the expression, “the tyranny of fashion,’” (p. 786). Clothing can be a result of hegemonic practices, dictated by constant reminder of ideologies of beauty and trends, and the U.S, then, should recognize their own cultural practices in relation to socially shared standards and moral ideologies, similar to Muslim women in other areas outside of the U.S.
Too often people, even feminists, fail to separate their desire for equality, freedom, entitlements, etc from ethical ideologies that associate with Western ideals. The want and need for general safety and sufficient living conditions for humans worldwide should outweigh the focus on historical location, Muslim women, religious labels and cultural practices.
In this work Parisi’s initial question is asking how does the cast type of male and female normalize heterosexuality as the meaning of human. Since the history of man it has been clearly understood what makes a man and woman different biologically but this piece examines how because of these cast into male and female dictate a hierarchy in which men are over women. She talks about how the coding into masculine and feminine is generated right after birth it is even included in all of language. Hetero-sexism is what has been considered normal by western culture. The struct of the house in which the man is the head of the house hold the woman is to serve the man and to take care of the house and the children while the man is the provider for the family. She talks about how heterosexuality and the family recreate the human rights discourse in which the public and private spheres are naturalized and the state is supposed to be bother protector and violator of rights. We have seen this in other works are well. Her reasoning for the belief that heterosexism is a more precise way of analyzing to relationship of gender difference and human rights is already fore stated. She puts a big emphasis on the effect of the normalizing of even the idea. It has been written that the man is the head, adopted by not just the western cultures but we can clearly see how it has been adopted by the eastern cultures as well , accepted by the woman and understood by society. The characteristics that define masculine and feminine has been almost set in stone that that any deviation causes concern and puts the normalization factor at risk of forever being tainted. Women have been told of there role pre put in a sphere a told this is how life must be at the expense of the safety of women. You as a woman are to be safer in the house not in the public eye and because it was adopted and accepted and not question or questioned but never out loud and never openly objected to, this is why it is so easy for heterosexuality to be the defining factor in how things should be. When someone tells you something who is supposed to have the best interest at heart you don’t think to question it. The spheres were created by men who control the state so is it any question women would believe that this is the way things have to be.
In her essay “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?” Abu-Lughod uses various past and present examples of colonialism to explain how there’s an “Western obsession” with Muslim women. Laura Bush’s address to the public following the attack on the World Trade Center in 2001 prompted Abu-Lughod to pose the question: why was there a consistent resort to knowing the cultural meaning, specifically the women and Islam, or knowing the meaning a religious ritual in order to understand the attacks on the World Trade Center? In her essay she uses an example from the French colonization of Algeria where there was a demonstration gathering held where the French women would ceremoniously unveil the women of Algeria in front of a crowd. The was done to show that Algeria was in agreement with the French. Abu-Lughod’s point is, why is the unveiling of Muslim women an hot topic for the West? The Taliban does force women to wear the burqa in Afghanistan but the issues for women in that region are deeper than the veil. She emphasizes that the Taliban did not invent the burqa and it is not a symbol for women’s oppression. I like that Abu-Lughod explained the veil by calling it a “mobile home” (2002:785). The veil symbolizes the separations of men’s and women’s spheres and associated women with family and home, not where strangers lie. Each form of veiling symbolizes participating in a different community and moral life in which family and home is held to the highest standard.
Abu-Lughod tells us to forego all “veils and vocations of saving others” (2002:789) and urges us to have a more productive approach to humanitarian efforts. Instead of focusing on the minuscule details of the lives of Muslim women, specifically the forced wearing of the burqa, to focus on the bigger picture at hand: creating a more just place for the entire world. Muslim women suffer from malnutrition, poverty and lack of opportunity to gain an education, but this is not solely a “third world” problem. These sorts of oppressive conditions can be found in most areas of he world. We should focus more on our input to the conditions of the world and our attitudes towards them. Abu-Lughod stresses that when you claim you are saving someone you are implying that you are saving them from something while simultaneously saving them to something, so we should respect each others differences when including oneself in humanitarian efforts.
In the essay, the author, Lila Abu-Lughod discusses various factors, which are connected to her argument and supports her claims. The first aspect that caught my attention was why culture and more specifically religious beliefs and women treatment, was more vital than exploring the history of the development of repressive regimes in the region and the U.S role. The history and how politics used to work didn’t seem important and expects were asked to give a full research on the religion and culture. Abu-Lughod prefers questions that leads the researchers to the exploration of global interconnections to have a better understanding why certain things works differently. The U.S is more focus on the cultural and religious beliefs of Afghan women and they are using the Burqa and vail as a reference. The Burqa and veil are symbols of oppression because Muslim women are forced to wear them sometimes it can turn into unjust treatment by man and full control over women. Abu-Loghod states, that the Taliban did not invent the burqa, they came from different places and in a way, were connected for the same purpose. The Taliban was used in one region by the Pashtun women for a form of local covering. And the burqa was another way to cover in the subcontinent and southwest. With time passing the burqa started to symbolize women’s modesty and respectability. A woman without the burqa was disrespectful and immodest (even if she wasn’t the burqa has more meaning than the person itself). In my opinion, all different types of covering form of faces and bodies created a separation spheres between women’s and men’s spheres. In other words, because of this rules that women need to follow on their everyday lives and if they don’t they are seems as someone bad influence for society, man have more opportunity to always be in charge and not be judge. All types of covering are also to prevent harassment from strange man, but I believe wearing full cover doesn’t prevent a man from committing sexual harassment. My question is, does wearing the burqa or other types of covering helps to stop harassment from estrange man. The covering form for women has different meanings depending on the region. I think the burqa and vail are important topics. However, they are more important topics to talk about referring to Muslim’s women and they are not being address. The call to saving women does not focus on women rights, human rights, or women safety of Muslim women. From my understanding, Abu-Lughod at the end of the article is basically saying to put aside the way muslim women dress and look at the things they need. There is a huge lack of women protection, little opportunity of women getting educated, and malnutrition. She states, when saying someone, you are implying that you are saying them to something.
Ruth Gilmore argues that expanding the prison population should be connected to a restructuring of the state. The crisis that Gilmore joins to the prison population in the United States is that the more people that are imprisoned the more women and children are without husbands and fathers. There is a social crisis because a lot of African American men are the ones that’s mostly going to prison and is making the social structure of things unbalanced. It seems like prison is this so call ” fix” for all of the chaos in society. “Until the 1960’s virtually all riots in the United States were battles instigated by white people against people of color, or by public or private police (including militia and vigilantes, also normally white) against organizing workers of all races. ( Gilmore 175) A good question was brought up in the test, “if crime rates peaked before the proliferation of new laws and new cages, what work does prison do”? and the test is right if crime rates were decreasing what was the point of having all these prisons being made? The test explains that the reason for this prison expansion were related to racism, racism especially towards blacks. This whole prison system treated the different races unjustly and the black were the ones getting the shorter end of the stick.
This prison expansion was a way to put a end to the socio-economic problems which of course was created by the state, it was not done to help the people of society but more to help the people in the state. “the state has used its enormous capacity to raise money, buy land and build and staff prisons. It also makes new laws that guarantee incarceration for more and more kinds of offences, old and new.” (Gilmore 185) Its like it was their solution (the state) to lock out someone and throw away the key so you wouldn’t have to deal with them again in society. Over all there were many different explanations for the expansion of the prison population, drug epidemic, structural changes in employment opportunities, however when the prison round ups began crime did indeed start to decrease, the public wanted a decrease in crime and they was in fact getting what they wanted. Even though the crime was going down the state was still making more and more prison beds. It still comes into question, was prisons really the fix? or the cover up.
Ruth Wilson Gilmore argue that expanding prison population is not helping the people. It is sad to know that USA is the country has more people incarcerated, and instead of helping people the system is trying to build more prisons. The main idea of Gilmore’s reading is all about the system and what they are doing? instead of helping, they just building more correctional facilities and spending money that can be use to help the population in so many ways.
During the reading Gilmore gives the cost of prison, and how much they spend to build one. “California has completed twenty two new prisons (1984), the new prisons, PLUS the state’s twelve previously exciting facilities, PLUS four new prisons being planned, PLUS internal expansions and PLUS….” Reading this paragraph make me think in the plus, California is not helping the population is just building more prisons to recruiter more prisoners and erase the problem by keeping the “bad people” in a prison.
There is a lawyer Bryan Stevenson that is trying to make a difference and created a way to make people see what is happening in our country and what can we do to change the system. He said that slavery still here but with a different name “prisoners”. It is sad to know that the story repeats from enslavement to mass incarceration.
Gilmore also mention the reason why the massive incarceration ” another explanation for the burgeoning prison population is the DRUG epidemic and the treat to public safety posed by the unrestrained and trade of illegal substances”…. that is true people have to survive and some times when poverty hits there is no choice, the only choice is either you use drugs to forget or sell them to try to get out of poverty. Here is when the system just see the problem as a crime, and it has to be punish by taking away the people and just incarcerated like an animal. In California there more african american and latinos incarcerated and every year the percentage is increasing just like I mention before PLUS more prisoner.
If only there is a way to created a system where can solving the problem is not just taking away women or men who commented any kind of crime, is finding a way to help those people not to committed a crime, using the money that is use to build prison, to make more programs, help communities, created more schools, and more jobs just to keep the population a better system.
In Lila Abu-Lughod’s essay, “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving? Anthropological Reflections on Cultural Relativism and It’s Others” she gives some insight as to how and why Americans came to relate the burqa, amongst other forms of covering, with the Taliban and other forms of terrorist groups. In addition, she argues whether or not Muslim women really need saving from where they are, or if they chose the life they have and are living out. She starts off by writing that we should consider the meaning if the burqa and other forms of covering , as well as veiling. While reading I have come to learn that women who cover themselves do so in order to show their social and economic standing. Although also for religious reasons, Muslim women have become accustomed to covering themselves because that is the society and community in which they live in.
These women say that only “good women” can wear burqa’s or veils. As a woman who makes a living as a street vendor had said, “If I did [wear the burqa] the refugees would tease me because the burqa is for ‘good women’ who stay inside the home (Fremson 2001:14)” (Abu-Lughod 2002: 786). Here we see that it is actually considered as sort of honor to be able to wear such coverings. However, after the Americans freed people from Taliban control, they assumed the women would no longer cover themselves with scarfs or veils, but were mistaken in thinking that they were being forced to cover themselves. They were not and as Abu-Lughod points out, it is rather that Westerners would have Muslim women adopt Western attire instead of maintaining the attire that they have been used to their whole lives.
Abu-Lughod gave an example of a time when French colonialism existed in Algeria and wished to enlist women’s help in order to move forward with their cause. That cause being that they wished to “… transform Arab women and girls” (Abu-Lughod 2002: 785). The French wanted the Arab women and girls to like the French, Christian women, much like when the British ruled Egypt. This is meant to show that whenever another country went into a Muslim country to “liberate” or “free” them, it doesn’t always bode well for the people who are supposedly meant to be “liberated”. Abu-Lughod implores us to look at the bigger picture, the fact that there are much larger problems to be worried about an need to be dealt with. Rather than wanting these modest Muslim woman to be someone they are not, they need to be left alone so that they may live their lives freely, since that was the initial intention.
Toni Mitchell
Assignment: Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving?
In the article Abu-Lughod She explores how the paradigm of saving Muslim women has gained momentum particularly in the aftermath of 9/11. She skillfully deconstruct the symbolic significance of a range of high profile ‘moral crusades’ involving Muslim women which have captured the global imagination. Abu-Lughod highlights how the most basic conditions of these women’s lives are set by political forces that are often national or even international in origin even if they are local in effect. What are often seen as ‘traditions’, therefore, are in fact responses to war and uncertainty, economic and political upheaval and instability. For example, in debates about Afghanistan, there is an overemphasis on cultural practices and little discussion about the effects of the injustices of war and militarization. Against this wider geopolitical background, she argues that concepts such as ‘oppression’, ‘choice’ and ‘freedom’ are blunt instruments for capturing the dynamics and quality of Muslim women’s lives in these places.
In the article, Abu-Lughod characterizes the Western framing of women’s rights in Muslim populations as highly contextual. Bibi Aysha for example is an Afghan woman whose Taliban husband and in-laws punished her by cutting off her nose. she the co-optation and manipulation of women’s rights in the politics and justification of the War on Terror. She used Laura Bush’s radio address in November of 2001 constituted a cry to action for the sake of Afghan women, a galvanizing of anti-terror forces in order to “save” the female population of Afghanistan. According to Abu-Lughod, this mobilization of support for the War on Terror through the framing of the conflict in terms of top-layer feminism is a classic example of Western co-optation of women’s rights as a means of bolstering support for the war. Sadly,reports focusing on global gender discrimination consistently ignore the rampant rape culture, unpunished domestic violence, and workplace gender discrimination that regularly takes place in Western countries such as our own.
tagline
Yes Im having difficulty sending Final Examine. My Cover page was was sent Im attempting to resubmit: however, the response stated paper will not post now.
Hi Ethel,
I just checked. Your exam has been posted to Blackboard.
Elizabeth