Lauren Booth’s conversion

Last month Lauren Booth, ex-PM Tony Blair’s sister in law, declared her conversion to Islam following a spiritual experience in Iran. Ever since this news was broadcast, there have been articles in most mainstream newspapers (tabloids and broadsheets) poking fun at her, making snide comments about rolling around on the floor at a holy shrine and even commenting on her mental stability – as though to convert to Islam one either has to be a) intimately involved with a Muslim; b) experiencing some life trauma, and so are vulnerable enough to convert and c) just be plain loopy.

Most of the negative vibes come as a result of the stereotypes banded around in the media of Muslims; wife beaters, deluded, extremist, detached from society, regressive and psychotic – some exaggerated stereotypes, but some add fuel to the fire and are pandered to by some Muslims themselves. Lauren acknowledges the bad press Islam and Muslims receive – but comments on the root causes of the state of Muslim women in the Muslim world:

So let’s all just take a deep breath and I’ll give you a glimpse into the other world of Islam in the 21st century. Of course, we cannot discount the appalling way women are mistreated by men in many cities and cultures, both with and without an Islamic population. Women who are being abused by male relatives are being abused by men, not God. Much of the practices and laws in “Islamic” countries have deviated from (or are totally unrelated) to the origins of Islam. Instead practices are based on cultural or traditional (and yes, male-orientated) customs that have been injected into these societies. For example, in Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive by law. This rule is an invention of the Saudi monarchy, our government’s close ally in the arms and oil trade. The fight for women’s rights must sadly adjust to our own government’s needs.

Of course as with most religions, Islam has patriarchial roots which seep into most of the practices, ideas and mindsets that Muslims have regarding how Muslim women should look, behave, speak and carry herself. Those who do not conform to these idea’s are often touted to be “modernist” or pitied as being “misguided” and in need of a huge guiding nudge in the right direction. Too often these assumptions are a result of having perceptions at a grandoise level regarding to how “knowledgable” they are – and of course these patrons are often men who’s duty it is to “save their sisters”.

Lauren as part of addressing the negativity surrounding her conversion comments on how emotionally dead non-Muslims now seem to her:

How hard and callous non-Muslim friends and colleagues began to seem. Why can’t we cry in public, hug one another more, say “I love you” to a new friend, without facing suspicion or ridicule? I would watch emotions being shared in households along with trays of honeyed sweets and wondered, if Allah’s law is simply based on fear why did the friends I loved and respected not turn their backs on their practices and start to drink, to have real “fun” as we in the west do? And we do, don’t we? Don’t we?

I couldnt help but think the lack of love-sharing in some households is not solely a non-Muslim issue – it involves factors beyond and above this; about family, character and personality dynamics and less about faith and religiousity. And the concept of personal space is a very British one – we don’t particularly like people sitting or standing too close to us if we can help it (especially the times when using public transport) be they strangers or even close loved ones. In certain cultures touching is more common, so people will greet one another with a kiss, say some words of affection and be very vocal about their feelings. Some of us want nothing more than a handshake. These are cultural not religious differences.

You can read the rest of Lauren’s article here

NiqaBitch

Recently France has been the centre of media attention what with it banning hijaab, followed closely by the outright ban of niqab in public spaces. In a form of protest against the dictatorship style role of the state, 2 French women (ethnicity of whom has remained largely unknown and refer to themselves as “NiqaBitch”) have taken to the streets in protest.  They, as with many others largely focus on clothing. But there is a twist.

They don a niqaab but bare their legs by wearing a miniskirt and sashay heels. The video is very tongue in cheek with the girls walking around Paris, posing outside buildings like the Ministry of Defence whilst wishing everyone peace – V hand gesture. Some people walk by pretending not to look, some praise them for their effort and others ask for them to pose and click away with their camera’s!

The statement these two ladies are making with regards to a piece of clothing that is considered repressive (niqaab) and the other which some would equate to as being immodest (miniskirt – lots of flesh on show) blends both the “sacred” and the “profane”.

Some may find the video distasteful, mocking the “sanctity” of niqaab (a piece of clothing cannot be sacred – the niqaab and to a certain level hijaab may for some encompass values, idea’s and beliefs which they believe manifest in it and may demonstrate a certain ideal but that ideal is a symbolic intepretation, one cannot apply those ideals to a piece of fabric!) but I feel it is an attempt to ridicule the French ban purely because their appearance is contradictory  and seems to be sending the popular message of “I am oppressed – niqaab” and I am a liberated, free woman “bare legs.

It is pertinent to note in the video that the passerby’s responses are generally of a good natured one primarily due to being aware that these girls are not donning the niqaab for religious reasons, that it is a stunt, a joke - all of which gives more weight to the islamphobic nature of the niqaab/hijaab ban. There is also the ”orientialist fetish” aspect to the two ladies appearance – the veiling of the face, but the bare skin eliciting the notion of a sexual being who is “unreachable”, a mysterious being – much of which has been pandered about for a long time (and is hard to avoid it seems!)

Dancing Boys of Afghanistan

A recent documentary on Channel 4, part of the new season of True stories programme took us through the hidden world of the dancing boys of Afghanistan. These are boys, under the age of 18 who are kept for entertainment purposes, to dance and shimmy with the older men (often their “owners” or guests at a party) with sex also being a component of their role as dancing boys. Bacha baazi, as its referred to, is a common practice in Northern regions of Afghanistan (but slowly trickling to other cities and provinces) perpertuated by older men,  the one’s in the documentary varying between the ages of 30-60 (some being older), often with enough disposible income and wealth to lure boys from impoverished backgrounds in the hope of supporting and sustaining their families in exchange. For those who struggle with the looming poverty reigning over them, as with most of the population, such an offer is hard to resist. Some families sincerely believe their boys will be used purely for dancing purposes only and not be sexually exploited.

The documentary made the point several times of the inaccessibility of women to the Afghan men due to the strict nature of purdah in the country resulted in the substitution of boys who were readily available and within their vicinity, from street children to those working in tea houses and food stalls. The reference to women being inaccessible somehow implied that were women available for entertainment and sexual pleasuring (prostitution), these boys would be spared which is quite a poor explanation and reasoning behind the popularity of bacha baazi )despite the boys often being dressed in women’s clothing and ghunghru for their dances and needing to be attractive in appearance, slim and nimble – like nymphs)

The keeping of boys, openly flaunted and boasted as being toy boys, was not about sexuality. Sexuality played little a role in the desire of these older men (some married, some single) enjoying them, boasting about their dancing talent, and holding parties especially for their friends and peers to come and watch and often take their boy home for the night. Some confessed to becoming habituated to having boys for company during their days in the fighting against the Russians and some of the boys wanting sex themselves, others professed an attraction for them whilst some simply enjoyed the elevated status it brought having a boy under their wing, to exploit and swap with their peers. There was no mention of plying the boys with drugs to keep them addicted and therefore wanting to stay, but I suspect this may be also be a factor or a method used in keeping them from running away (aside from the threat of being killed and/or beaten)

Boys for this purpose remain this “charm” until they hit adulthood, which for the Afghan men would be around 18. After this, the boys are no longer desirable and left to go. And often the victims may become perpetrators of the same kind,  as one dancing boy shared his goal of having 20-30 dancing boys when he is able to afford it and hold parties for his friends to be entertained in the same manner as he had been entertaining his “masters” friends, despite stating in the beginning he had no choice in becoming like this or living this existence so had accepted it. An insight as to what these parties consist:

The orchestra started up with a curious, plaintive melody, the rhythm being taken up and stressed by the kettle drums, and four bachehs took up their positions on the carpet. The bachehs are young men specially trained to perform a particular set of dances. Barefoot, and dressed like women in long, brightly-coloured silk smocks reaching below their knees and narrow trousers fastened tightly round their ankles, their arms and hands sparkle with rings and bracelets. They wear their hair long, reaching below the shoulders, though the front part of the head is clean shaven. The nails of the hands and feet are painted red, the eyebrows are jet black and meet over the bridge of the nose. The dances consist of sensuous contortions of the body and a rhythmical pacing to and fro, with the hands and arms raised in a trembling movement. As the ballet proceeded the number of dancers increased, the circle grew in size, the music waxed shriller and shriller and the eyes of the native onlookers shone with admiration, while the bachehs intoned a piercing melody in time with the ever-growing tempo of the music. The Heir explained that they were chanting of love and the beauty of women (Source)

What used to be brushed under the carpet or denied, is now openly flaunted with the government being aware of it but doing nothing. One wonders what kind of a life these boys end up etching for themselves and where the morals of the men who engage in this are, or how they manage to dabble in this sort of things and feel no sense of guilt in destroying the lives and innocence of these poor boys.

Objectifying Muslim Women as Sex Symbols

It was always a Muslim woman’s fault. If some ignorant non-Muslim playfully tugged her hijaab in the computer lab, it was her fault because she gave him the liberty to be that free with her. If a man was checking her out, it was her fault because she didn’t choose to wear a long shirt. Unfortunately, I find this sexist mentality to be very prevalent in Sunni orthodoxies, especially among Muslim men. The disturbing thing, in my opinion, is how I thought that everything I believed about Muslim women, how they should dress, and how they should behave was not sexist, but actually liberating because it taught Muslim women how to be “real,” “respectable” women.

Over the years, I learned that it wasn’t about liberating women. It was about controlling them and molding them the way *I* wanted them to be. The way a lot Muslim *men* want them to be: obedient, passive, soft-spoken, sensitive, reserved, etc. In my mind, it was improper and sacrilegious for Muslim women to even flirt with a man, to even make a mentioning of sex, to even have male friends. Why? Because with this sexist, over-controlling, and uber-conservative mindset, it is always about sex.

ALWAYS. ABOUT. SEX.

Why can’t Muslim women be friends with men? Because there is a chance of sex. Why can’t Muslim women laugh or smile at a man? Because one of them might be thinking about sex. Why can’t Muslim women and Muslim men shake hands? Because they might get so turned on that they’ll rip each other’s clothes off and start having sex. Oh my God, if I hear a woman give the azaan (call to prayer), I’ll start thinking about sex because a woman’s voice is attractive and alluring. Oh no, we can’t take the partition out of the Mosques, the women and men won’t be able to keep their hands off each other. As if there’s a high risk of a giant orgy or something. That sounds practical.

And it’s not that sex is a bad thing — it’s not — but when it’s used in this hyper-sexual context to control the way women think, behave, and dress, it becomes something very dirty. Extremely dirty (see the paragraph above). Over time, this made me very uncomfortable because on one hand, Muslims would stress so much on “modesty” and not seeing each other as sex objects, but ironically, that is exactly what we were doing: sexually objectifying each other. The young Muslim man at the event who said he gets attracted by a woman’s neck is talking about her as a sex object, as if her body is so tempting that he cannot resist it, hence she must cover up. It also made me wonder if he had any idea how disgusting and sexual his comment was, considering that the majority of women (Muslim and non-Muslim) in the room had their necks visible? What is he saying, that he is thinking about each and every one of them sexually? And that if his mind is flooded with sexual thoughts, it is their fault?

Read the rest of this brilliant article here. Thanks to Organica for the link!

This article echo’s much of my old posts, comments and opinions on this blog. Its very true that as Muslims we hyper sexualise everything especially gender interactions. Disappointingly women bear the brunt of this and are very much seen as walking talking sexual fitnahs which is a sad reality indeed.

 Most often its this view which creates unncessary sexual friction and tension between the genders, in innocuous situations and circumstances. Heck you can’t even shop at a grocers were the person serving you may end up being a Muslim brother without feeling the unnecessary tension! It’s almost becoming an epidemic in our communities.

We (women) are more than the sum of our (private) parts!

Movies to watch: The Infidel

If there is one movie which anyone would find intruiging, it would be about a Muslim taxi driver (cabbie) who whilst clearing out the home of his recently departed mother discovers he was adopted and infact was Jewish at birth. There ensues some funny moments as Mahmud (Omid Djalili) begins his journey in discovering his Jewish roots – The Infidel.

There’s been much in the papers about the movie. Some praise it for being a sensitive portrayal of a painful journey into identity, others deem it to be not deep enough. I thought it was funny – but you need to understand British humour otherwise it’ll be wasted on you.

Do watch it if you can!