Girls Being Fed Last and Least

November 20, 2009 at 6:28 pm | In Culture, Life, Men, Patriarchy, Women | 16 Comments

In one of the many slum districts I visited, the level of sexual abuse and exploitation of young girls was truly horrifying. In the face of such extreme suffering, the goal of getting back into the classroom can seem at times a little trivial, but it is a crucial part of rebuilding a normal life. There are towns all over the world like São Luis, where girls are often little more than runners-up in the human race.

And to make matters worse in this era of financial instability, girls are fed last and least. As copulation equals population, an unplanned pregnancy means joining a giant missing persons bureau. And who is missing? The girl with potential – the girl she was BC (Before Childbirth).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/17/glass-ceiling-girls-developing-world

 

One doesn’t need to go to Brazil or any developing 3rd world country where resources are next to nil to witness the last and least feeding of girls. This approach of feeding girls (and women) last is quite common amongst Asian’s,  whereby the men get the pick of the crop, the first servings of hot food and the mere women…well they’re resigned to eating left overs, food that has gone cold, incomplete meal platters (since its in the other room or finished entirely) and scrape the bottom of the pan for the morsel of food remaining.

It’s disgusting. It has nothing to do with taking “pride” in serving the men first -what there is to take “pride” in knowing the men have full stomaches whereby the girls have little to eat is incomprehensible unless there is an obvious bias. It is blatant patriarchy and against the spirit of good faith. What sort of mothers, fathers and brothers knowingly can gorge on food whilst their daughters/sisters are left hungry?

I’ve been to functions where the women and children are told to eat first (as often the kids are wailing for their hungry stomaches) and the men second (not being left to eat scraps either, but served hot food) but of course these things only happen in events where its more “proper” and “right” to do this .

In their own homes however its a different story. One face for the world, and another entirely for indoors.

Kahani Tawaif Ki Zubani: Tale of a Courtesan (Heera Mandi)

August 14, 2009 at 11:25 pm | In Culture, Gender Issues, History, Learning, Life, Men, Muslims, Patriarchy, Society, Women | 2 Comments

Following from my previous post on the book DAncing Girls of Lahore is this documentary into the lives of prostitutes of Heera Mandi. The documentary goes through the various reasons behind this trade, their own stories, the lives of generations of tawaif’s who are born into the profession, the prized virgnity of young courtesans, the secrets and revelations made by sex workers themselves, their pimps (some whom are the male members of the family) and even the musicians which provide the medium for mujra entertainment.

This is part 1 of 6. The rest is available on youtube

Dancing Girls of Lahore by Louise Brown

August 12, 2009 at 10:09 pm | In Culture, Discursive, Gender Issues, Learning, Life, Literature, Men, Muslims, Patriarchy, Research, Society, Women | 4 Comments

Dancing Girls of Lahore by Louise Brown

This semi academic book documents the lives of women of Lahore’s notorious Heera Mandi - a colony infamous for its brothels and adult entertainment, spanning across centuries.

Louise spends around 5 years in Heera Mandi – spanning the various seasons of the year and followed one family over this period of time. Maha, a daughter of a prostitute and being in the business herself and her children, 4 girls and a boy portray a tiny glimmer of life in the brothel colony where relationships and love are framed in the context of sex and money and ultimately the powerful control these facets exert on the lives of the women.

I found the encompassing manner of including the many faces, personalities and dynamics which exist in Heera Mandi to be meticulously detailed. Glimpsing into the lives of the staggering and often stoned heroin addicts, the pimps openly conducting business transactions, in the streets, kusray, their communities, circumstances and the bittersweet relationships they have with one another, themselves and larger society to various Heera Mandi prostitutes – the old tawaifs from the era of the British Raj and nawab sahibs, to those girls fleeing destitution and poverty in villages, towns and cities in the hope of re-hashing a life rather than a mere existence provided Heera Mandi – the “Diamond Market”- a portrayal which reflected the many layers in which a society as fragmented as this was in many ways also cohesive. It’s people and the social norms and rules which regulate their existence being at odds with the larger convservative society, respect, honour and family being the cornerstone of a decent life, in loggerheads with an identity heavily loaded with stigma and a forever permeating presence of Heera Mandi in the lives of those tainted by it – regardless of how far they flee, and how long the exile lasts. Once a prostitute, always a prostitute – especially if you’re from Heera Mandi

The striking contrast played against the backdrop of a conservative Pakistani society – which almost ironically mirrors the location of Heera Mandi within Lahore nestled between the infamous Badshai Masjid, Roshnai Gate and Hazur Baagh is discreetly described through the relative secrecy in which the workers at Heera Mandi operate.

From wealthly clients such as Sheikhs from the Gulf, to politicians, members of the cabinet and entrepeneurs it takes little to realise the very sustenance of the women in Heera Mandi is dependent on the rich and affluent who can afford to purchase sex from quality women with the power dynamics often being skewed in favour of them.

However, there is much bartering and emphasise on the quality of goods – such as the age of the girl (the younger the better), her beauty (skin colour, features, attractive assets), her reputation (good dancer and sex worker) with the sale of a virgin girl being much prized, the relative desperation in terms of poverty of the family and the extent to which thise could be exploitated  -these all form a part in the agreed fee for their services, be it sexual or entertainment (mujra ) in the form of dance. Many clients may come and go, but the girls live in the hope of snaring a wealthy client who’s interest remains sustained enough to lead the girl and her family a comfortable life.

At what cost to their own chances of leading a life away from the brothels, to have a relationship based on love and affection as opposed to sex and financial gain is an underlying theme throughout the part academic/part biographical accounts of the women of Heera Mandi.

I’d recommend this great read. Another more detailed review can be found here.

Banning the “Burka”

June 25, 2009 at 3:08 pm | In Culture, Discursive, Islam, Media, Men, Muslims, Non-Muslim, Patriarchy, Society, Women | 17 Comments

Recently French president Sarkozy, upon returning from Afghanistan stated that the burka was not welcome in France and argued for it to be banned despite it being a rare practise in the province.

There have been calls in favour of this , largely due the argument of it being synoymous with oppression and subjation of women, whereas others argue state intervention in how people dress to be a dangerous ground to tread, and its subjectivity.

Surely state interference in what is acceptable to wear in public (as France may very well be on the path towards) makes it similar to other countries who enforce various dress codes for its citizens (e.g. Saudi, & Iran – and Afghanistan during Taliban rule). These countries are often attacked for being limiting, intimidating and impinging on rights of its citizens as a result of their laws and regulations, some being puritanically enforced moreso than others.

Much of this discussion has spread into Britain which has its own chequered history regarding the niqaab, as was the infamous comment made by Jack Straw who found interacting with niqaabed women as “uncomfortable”. Others argue the aggressive alienation that niqaab perpetuates, it indicates “I wish not to talk to you” or “I wish to be different”. Perhaps the Emo’s, Punks and Goths (and the numerous other groups who pride on being “different”) are trying to be inclusive by their demeanour? Another commentator  in a tabloid newspaper stated the niqaab prevents communication and explicitly states “I don’t wish to talk to you”. I don’t recall there being a single occurrence where I have witnessed a hubbub of conversation on the Tube amongst complete strangers. None of them are “impaired” by having a niqaab on. All but a rare few have their face on full show for communicative purposes, so where is this chitter chatter?!

Despite calls by some segments of the population to follow Sarkozy’s call for banning burka (niqaab), such an enforcement would not be possible in the UK which prides itself on being a multi-cultural country, and promotes cultural diveristy, where freedom of faith and religious practise is key. Much argue this multiculturalism is the cause of the lack of integration and assimilation of slivers of the minority ethnic, and was the often touted cause for the 7/7 tube bombings and concern over growing and silently breeding extremism/islamism amongst its Muslim minority. And of course the result of this and many other situations involving individuals from BME communities, has led to the increasing popularity of the right wing political group, the BNP.

Instead discussions involving niqaab and its undesirability in the UK have focused on issues of identity and security and have remained within those parameters. Very occasionally has the discussion spilled over the veil being a male symbol of repression of the woman quite as fiercly as Sarkozy has propositioned.

One would argue in a free society (which Britain supposedly is – despite the much Big Brother style surveillance) the state cannot dictate what is or isn’t acceptable to wear in public. So you can dress in niqab, hijab, a turban, a Somali style khimaar, Orthodox Jewish attire, long robes, small shorts and a tank top, vest tops and hot pants or in your underwear etc. Only thing illegal is nudity in public spaces, unless it is has a permit to allow nudity.

The argument of whether the niqab is a religous order or a cultural phenomenon is irrelevant as the primary focus in this discussion sparked by Sarkozy is the item of clothing itself and its symbolic association with repressive practises. Despite interpretations and associations of the symbolic nature of the niqaab (confused with the burka here) there will remain a proportion of women who will wear it with convinction of it being a personal choice, regardless of the arguments of its requirement or otherwise on religious grounds.

Should Neither Be Seen Nor Heard…

May 6, 2009 at 8:55 pm | In Culture, Discursive, Gender Issues, Islam, Men, Muslims, Patriarchy, Women | 41 Comments

…at least children are told they should be seen but not heard. Women it turns out should completely render their existence obsolete. As quietly as possible please, phase yourselves out, as not to disturb the sentiments of the menfolk who lose all sense at the sheer sight of our bony hands and round faces as per hijaab rules. Or eyes if you are privy to niqaab.

It irks me to find time and time again certain attitudes from Muslim women regarding how the Muslim sisterhood should behave, what characteristics they should have and ultimately what their role in the grand scheme of life should be. Please let me explain in more detail:

  • Women should try their utmost to not be appealing to men. This includes wearing “colours which do not attract attention” in other words black, to fit the appearance of a crow as per this hadith:

Abu Dawood (4101) narrated that Umm Salamah said: “When the words ‘and to draw their veils all over Juyoobihinna (i.e. their bodies, faces, necks and bosoms)’ [al-Noor 24:31 – interpretation of the meaning] were revealed, the women of the Ansaar went out looking as if there were crows on their heads because of their garments.” Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood.(Source)

  • They should not “invoke desires in men” by means of their garb, and their scent – so perfumes are out and BO is in:

‘Unadorned’ means not wearing perfume… they are commanded to go out like this and are forbidden to wear perfume lest they provoke men’s desires with their perfume. That also includes other things which are forbidden because they provoke desire, such as beautiful clothing and visible and expensive adornment. (Source)

  • Women should not make any noise whilst out in pubic, so tinkling jewellery, clicking shoes, jingling keys – all avenues to Hell.
  • She should not raise her voice, if possible she should not speak at all since a man may become aroused on hearing such a sweet murmur. Is a woman’s voice awrah or not? After all Aisha (ra) spoke to the men who came and visited her (from behind a curtain) with a finger in her mouth to distort her voice. But we are not subject to the same rulings as the Prophets (saw) wives were. Emulating them  in character is one thing, but to effectively live life as they did along with the limitations and special injunctions they had is not a requirement nor a necessity for Muslim women.  Having the opinion that a woman’s voice is awrah effectively makes her become mute, as all of her is awrah. But, on the flip side, it is said of course she can talk, but to do so firmly – no pleasantries; just in, command, purchase/enquire and out. So a “thank you” and a “have a good day” have no place in this fitnatastic world.

Something strange (which I found strange anyway) I wish to share with you all. A few weeks ago, I attended what can only be described as a small mendhi/henna function for the neighbours son. It didn’t even feel like a mendhi, I didnt think they’d have one what with being of a certain religious persuasion and so not of the singing kind (women singing out loud in the house? The shame of it all!) but anyway that’s a different topic altogether. What I want to bring to your attention is this:

We were sitting there, munching away as you do. And the doorbell goes, someone goes to answer it as is the norm. This girl  (who is related to the chap somehow or other) runs into the room having answered the door exclaiming “Its a MAN” ~shock horror~ A man? A member of that species? Oh dear God. I had about to hide my expression behind my plate as to not give away the look which was forming on my face. It was a cross between “how pathetic” and “oh for God sake, what stupidity, are all women down in this part of the UK inherently man-a-phobic?” I have come across this “Its a man” phenomenon usually amongst women who wear hijab (strictly) whenever there is an impending threat of a man about to enter the room or simply waft across anywhere near where the women may be. “Its a man” usually indicates to take cover under your hijabs should you have decided to remove them in the first place.

If its not man-a-phobia then it is giving preferential treatment to the men:

  1. The men will eat first, the women later even if there is ample room for them all to sit together to eat. Months ago, during my newly wedded days, I was asked by an extended family member if this type of gatherinbg was the same in my family I replied “no, we – the men and women- sit together and eat” – the response to that? “Oh we can eat how much we want this way, stuff ourselves silly w/o the men watching! hahahahah” – I think there was meant to be humour in there somewhere….
  2. The men will get the roomiest of places to sit in even if they amount to a grand total of 5 people and the women nearing 20, including the children who harbour the kitchen or a small room off the kitchen.
  3. The men when together expect their women to not be seen nor heard. God forbid other men catch on there are women in the house. The women are just there to churn out the tea and biscuits. And cook of course. Their existence amounts to little else but to serve men as he is their gateway to Hell and Heaven.
  4. Women don’t have an opinion on anything. Even if they do, don’t voice it – it’s not very womanly to debate and go against the decision of the man

Children get the better end of the deal than women do it seems.

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.