In an article in The Electronic Intifada entitled "Who is the Real Oppressor of Gaza Women's Rights," Yasmeen al Khoudary laments that when it comes to oppression of Palestinian women, the western media tends to focus on "trivial" issues while ignoring the "real" ones such as the occupation.
She may have a point, but the way she goes about it undermines her argument and raises major red flags for me. Partly because I've heard it all before. It's the broken record about priorities (for nationalists) and major vs. minor contradictions (for Marxists) etc. etc. But also because she basis her argument on the false assumption that Palestinian women in Gaza (or anywhere for that matter) have one oppressor. She calls that the "real" oppressor. Other sources of oppression are dismissed, minimized, trivialized, and ridiculed. Only the occupation oppresses Gazan women. Any other grievance is to be suspected and dismissed.
So, according to the article, when a young Gazan woman complains in front of a foreign diplomat about having to wear the hijab, the writer has to take her aside and chastise her for bringing up irrelevant issues. She reminds her that Hamas does "not ban women from not wearing it" (interesting way of putting it) and that if the girl comes from a conservative family or neighborhood that makes her veil, then it's a personal issue and not the fault of the government. Then she concludes: "There's a fine line between our mildly conservative traditions and the rules that Hamas imposes on our society, and the two need not be mixed for the sake of our image." In other words, Hamas's social policies over the past two decades are to be erased. The problem is that our society is "mildly conservative" (come on! who can't live with that!!) and to mix the two by blaming this conservatism on Hamas is to hurt our image!!!!
Ah, so it's all about image!!! The last thing we need is for those foreigners to think badly of us!
I'm sure that "quiet" young woman will be quieter from now on, having been told in effect that she is ignorant and that she failed the Palestinian people by bringing up such irrelevant topics. The chastiser, not surprisingly, fails to see that in shutting up her colleague (and writing an article about her folly) she is oppressing her as well. It's not the oppression of the occupation, but it is still "real."
It is possible to critique the western media and its biases without dismissing the other issues that do oppress women (and some men). Oppression is like disasters: it comes in multiple forms. It is possible to fight against the occupation AND to fight against other forms of oppression (social, patriarchal, national). We need to always remind the western media and OURSELVES before them that the fight against the occupation is a fight for self determination and freedom: of expression, of movement, of association, and of choice, collectively and individually.
The fact that some use women's rights or gay rights to whitewash and pinkwash the Israeli occupation does not mean we should stop fighting for these rights.
Otherwise, it's a half-assed liberation not worth dying for!
She may have a point, but the way she goes about it undermines her argument and raises major red flags for me. Partly because I've heard it all before. It's the broken record about priorities (for nationalists) and major vs. minor contradictions (for Marxists) etc. etc. But also because she basis her argument on the false assumption that Palestinian women in Gaza (or anywhere for that matter) have one oppressor. She calls that the "real" oppressor. Other sources of oppression are dismissed, minimized, trivialized, and ridiculed. Only the occupation oppresses Gazan women. Any other grievance is to be suspected and dismissed.
So, according to the article, when a young Gazan woman complains in front of a foreign diplomat about having to wear the hijab, the writer has to take her aside and chastise her for bringing up irrelevant issues. She reminds her that Hamas does "not ban women from not wearing it" (interesting way of putting it) and that if the girl comes from a conservative family or neighborhood that makes her veil, then it's a personal issue and not the fault of the government. Then she concludes: "There's a fine line between our mildly conservative traditions and the rules that Hamas imposes on our society, and the two need not be mixed for the sake of our image." In other words, Hamas's social policies over the past two decades are to be erased. The problem is that our society is "mildly conservative" (come on! who can't live with that!!) and to mix the two by blaming this conservatism on Hamas is to hurt our image!!!!
Ah, so it's all about image!!! The last thing we need is for those foreigners to think badly of us!
I'm sure that "quiet" young woman will be quieter from now on, having been told in effect that she is ignorant and that she failed the Palestinian people by bringing up such irrelevant topics. The chastiser, not surprisingly, fails to see that in shutting up her colleague (and writing an article about her folly) she is oppressing her as well. It's not the oppression of the occupation, but it is still "real."
It is possible to critique the western media and its biases without dismissing the other issues that do oppress women (and some men). Oppression is like disasters: it comes in multiple forms. It is possible to fight against the occupation AND to fight against other forms of oppression (social, patriarchal, national). We need to always remind the western media and OURSELVES before them that the fight against the occupation is a fight for self determination and freedom: of expression, of movement, of association, and of choice, collectively and individually.
The fact that some use women's rights or gay rights to whitewash and pinkwash the Israeli occupation does not mean we should stop fighting for these rights.
Otherwise, it's a half-assed liberation not worth dying for!
