From: bes@cco.caltech.edu (Behnam Sadeghi)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Re: Words Feminists find Demeaning!
Date: 26 Aug 92 20:37:03 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena

In article <713648718@bronto.cs.duke.edu> ghbr@fmg.bt.co.uk (Hossein Bagherzadeh Rafsanjani) writes:

>And we supposedly should be happy going around bragging about the status of
>women in our own (homeland) societies and feel no responsibilty whatsoever in
>voicing the plight of millions who are suffering (with the explicit or implicit
>approval of religious and state authorities) under the harsh social, religious,
>moral and civil codes.

It is interesting that you accuse me of "bragging about the status of women in our
own societies and feeling no responsibility whatsoever in voicing the plight of 
millions..."    How could you miss the fact that in the previous paragraph in my 
posting I had written that women  ARE oppressed in Muslim countries?  I would be 
the last person in the world to claim otherwise.   So please be careful about what 
you attribute to people.  And please read the whole of an article before commenting
on its author.

The point of my article was to point out the hypocrisy of those who
have a hobby of exaggerating the poor status of women in Muslim countries while
pushing under the rug the problems faced by the women in the West.  I pointed
that these people don't care at all for Muslim women (or men).  What they
are doing is to ease their conscience about the status of women in their own
cultures and to make themselves feel better by putting down other cultures.
So, I pointed out to them that instead of shedding rivers of crocodile tears
for  women in other countries, they better spend some of their energy worrying
about their own culture as well.

Obviously, this is not to say that everybody who criticizes the status of women
in Muslim countries belongs to the category I described above.  There are also
sincere human beings who are genuinely concerned about the oppression of women.
Such people do not try to use the question of women as a method of covering up
their insecurities, easing their conscience, and claiming superiority over other
cultures.  Such people are also NOT blind to the oppression of women in the West.
They do not *look* *down* upon other nations; they *care* for them.

In my article, I pointed out a number of facts about my country Iran: e.g. about
women politicians, writers, doctors, engineers, film-makers, etc.   This must
not be taken as bragging about the status of women in Iran, otherwise I wouldn't
have stated in an earlier paragraph that women ARE oppressed in
Iran.  The reason why I mentioned these FACTS is very simple.  To the average
brainwashed American citizen --assuming that he is familiar with the word "Iran"--
the very fact that Iranian women can (and do) own property comes as a shock!  In
other words, they have an exaggerated and unrealistic understanding of the situation.
So, it is beneficial for them to be informed that even though women are oppressed
in Iran, some of their perception of the situation has nothing to do with reality. 

Such misinformation is very common, even among the so-called educated class.
For example, in a seminar in my former university, Occidental College,
a group of students who had supposedly "researched" the status of
women in Iran, gave a talk which was garbage from the beginning to the end.
For example, they claimed that half of Iranian males are polygamous.  [I checked
their sources, and the only figure I found stated that LESS THAN one percent
of Iranian males are polygamous].    One could also mention famous TV personality,
Diane Sawyer, who claimed in 60 minutes that Iranian women cannot own property!!  She 
also falsely misquoted Rafsanjani as having said that women have smaller brains and
smaller hearts than men, therefore men should rule over women!  (I checked the
Persian text of the speech and verified that he had not said this at all).

And when I try to help some Western readers to get rid of their superstitions,
I am accused of boasting about the status of women in Iran!  When I say that
they should be concerned about ALL women, including the women in their own
countries, I am told that I am ignoring the plight of Muslim women!

>Where should our loyalties really belong?  To the oppressors who are ruling
>these societies and perpetuate the status quo, or to the millions of helpless
>girls/women who are forced into marriage, who are sold in marriages, who are
>subject to perpetual rape in-and-out of marriage, who when they are raped
>(outside the marriage) they are in a bigger danger of being killed by their own
>relatives (to "save their honour"), who are beaten by their husbands
>as-a-matter-of-routine (for disobeyance on the grounds that it is sanctioned in
>Qoran) and even by other male relatives, who can be divorced and kicked out of
>their conjugal home at any time, who when divorced or widowed with no state
>support for themselves or children may be foced into prostitution (religious or
>otherwise) if the ex-husband evade supporting them (which so often happens),
>who when widowed can be kicked out of their life-long conjugal home, who etc,
>etc, etc...

No doubt instances of what you describe above exist in various Muslim countries.
Some of what you describe is probably more common in the West, while others are
more common in Muslim countries.  I offer the following _speculations_ about Iran
and the United States.

1.  Forced marriages are probably more common in Iran than in the U.S.  But
it should be pointed out that forced marriages are not the rule, they are
exceptions.   All the marriages I have witnessed have taken with full 
interest and desire of couple.  (The fact that families usually play a 
very signifcant part in facilitating the process, and usually in match-making, 
must not be confused with forced marriage).   

Forced marriages are quite rare in the U.S.  However, in the Iranian media 
now and then one reads about such marriages [e.g. in agony columns in womens'
weekly, Zan-e Rooz, or in Etela'ate Javanan].   It's on this basis that I believe
this phenomenon is relatively more common in Iran than the U.S.

2.  With regard to wife-beating, newsweek had an article about this a few years
ago.  There are *millions* of cases of *reported* wife beating in the US every
year.  Forty percent of these take place under the influence of alcohol or other
drugs.  In the Iranian media too, I come across descrptions of wife-beating as
well, though I don't have any statistics about the situation in Iran.  My belief
is that the problem is probably equally prevalent in both countries.  (Also, in
both countries, wife-beating is an exception, not the rule).

3.  Rape: even though instances of such atrocities undoubtedly exist in Iran (as 
avouched by the fact that some reported cases are published in the media), I feel
pretty confident that the numbers of rape --within or outside marriage-- doesn't
come anywhere close to the number of rape in the U.S.  [According to the FBI, in
the U.S. one out of every three women is "sexually assaulted" some time in her life.
More recent research has demonstrated this to be an under-estimate.]  Another relevant
piece of statistics is that various studies have independently arrived at the estimate
that 1/4 of female children are sexually molested.  The corresponding figure for male
children is 1/9.   I don't have access to the relevant statistics of sexual crimes
in Iran.  But I am confident that such crimes, from rape to prostitution, are more
common in the U.S.   It would require careful consideration and research to arrive
at the reason why this is the case, but I would offer the following *hypotheses* :

1.  The media's sexual objectification of women.
2.  The prevalence of pornographic or violent movies.
3.  The deterioration and destruction of the family unit.
4.  The greater prevalence of alcohol consumption in the U.S.
5.  The relatively smaller emphasis and belief in religion (or some other system of ethics).
6.  The *relatively* lenient punishments for rape in the U.S.  [a rapist going on 
    parole after six months of jail is not unheard of].

Some American feminists have wisely identified and attacked *some* of the above 
problems (numbers 1, 2, and 6).   I can only wish success for them.

{Incidental comment:
There are also a small number of feminists who seem to have been driven to insanity
by the media's sexual objectification of women.  For example, a group of such women
who were rightfully outraged by the objectification common in the form of emphasis on
the size of women's breasts, decided to demonstrate topless in protest.  Their 
reasoning was that if they successfully made toplessness more common, then perhaps males
would get used to it and stop objectifying women. (To see the futility of their
attempts, all they have to do is to look at European countries in which toplessness
is more common, yet women's objectification is no less prevalent).  I think modest
and decent dress is more useful in this struggle than nudity.   End of incidental
comments.}

>Shouldn't there be the slightest human consceience in us to hear these loud
>voices?  Are we just happy to quote the rape statistics in the States to boast
>about "our" women?  Have you ever thought why there are no comparable
>statistics in our societies?  Can any women in Iran or Pakistan go direct to
>the police station and say "officer, I was just raped"?  And if she ever does
>it, wouldn't it be first and foremost to ask for protection from her own
>relatives (the same people whose support she would desparately need in order to
>overcome the trauma of rape)?  Is it really that hard for some to understand
>these harsh realities?

Firstly, I clearly was NOT boasting about the status of women in Iran!

Secondly, I take it that you are not completely making up what you say about raped 
women being harmed by their own family in Iran. Perhaps you have heard about some
instances of such phenomenon.  However, the mistake you're making is to generalize an
example.  I think ignorant and savage people who would harm a raped female
relative are not common in Iran (if any such person exists at all).

>Can't we understand that we live in an institionalised unequal society in
>whcih half the population is denied equal rights in many aspects of life
>including in marriage?  Isn't it the direct result of these apartheid regimes
>that Iran and many Arab countries (that is, the most religious ones) sent only
>an all-male team to the Olympics?

You seem unable to focus on any given train of thought.  One moment we're
talking about cultures, the next moment you cite "regimes" as proof for
your views.   Anyways...

I have no argument at all with the statement that, say in Iran, what we have
is an institutionalized, historical, and cultural form of patriarchy.  [In fact,
I can't name any country which doesn't fit that description].

However, I disagree with some of your specific claims.  Iran has sent women's
teams to foreign competitions in fields that don't violate
the dress code (e.g. shooting, etc.) or to countries that provide the proper
facilities for women.   If the Olympic committe were considerate
enough to provide the necessary facilities for Muslim women, then Muslim women
would definitely participate in swimming, gymnastics, and all the other sports.
In Iran, women are active in all sports, from swimming to basketball.  (You can
read Zan-e Rooz to get updated on the results of the lastest women's competitions).

If you think separte restrooms or sports facilities for the sexes is "appartheid,"
I should mention that most Muslims would find such a viewpoint amusing!  

By the way, words such as "appartheid" or "segregation" can be used only when 
one of the two separated groups is opposed to the separation.  For example,
if tommorrow, 60% of Iranian women become opposed to separated restrooms, THEN
we could say that Iranian water closets are "segregated."  Meanwhile, we have
to content ourselves with the use of the word "separate."

>
>-hossein

Behnam Sadeghi
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam