KABOBfest » hijab

To All The Haters..

Sana — Sun, 06 Mar 2011 09:22:47 +0000

I made this years ago, in response to the Quebec Reasonable Accommodation debate, where it was published as a cartoon in my university paper. I suppose more than ever it is still relevent.

And very true. So don’t mess. Seriously.

An Open Letter to ABC’s 20/20 regarding “Islam: Questions and Answers”

Maytha — Wed, 27 Oct 2010 03:53:10 +0000

In light of the highly problematic portrayal of Muslims in ABC’s 20/20 September 29, 2010 episode “Islam: Questions and Answers,” a colleague of mine, Margari Hill (who is also an amazing blogger in her own right), and I wrote an open letter to the production team of the program. If you are interested in supporting this effort and endorsing this letter, please click on the link here to fill out the requested information and share with others who shared similar sentiments about the episode.

An Open Letter to ABC’s 20/20 regarding “Islam: Questions and Answers” Season 31, Episode 3

We applaud ABC’s 20/20 for producing the program “Islam: Questions and Answers,” which attempted to address the American public’s curiosity about Islam and show the true face of Islam in America. However, as scholars, activists, educators, and community leaders, we are concerned about the ways in which this program misrepresented Muslim Americans. We would like to address three major areas where your program inaccurately depicted Islam in America: first, by continually asserting that moderate Muslims do not speak up; second, by overlooking the contributions of African American Muslims; and finally, allowing women who have complete antipathy towards Islam (Pamela Gellar and Ayaan Hirsi) to speak for Muslim women. The producers and researchers may have been well meaning; however the program’s insensitivity and lack of nuance alienated many American Muslims and perpetuated many misconceptions about American Muslims. Our aim is to address these three areas and provide some recommendations for more accurate coverage of American Muslims in the future.

1. First, the show continually asked, “Why don’t we hear or see more mainstream, peaceful Muslims speaking up?” or “Where are the moderate voices?”
* It is problematic to divide Muslims into binary categories of “moderate” and “radical.” Would the same categorical statement be made about the socio-political orientation of followers of different religious faiths and other ethnic groups? How would the mainstream reaction to your program be had you produced a segment titled “Where are all the moderate Christians?” or “Where are all the moderate Latino Americans?” The framing of these questions and methodology of answering these questions highlights an acceptability of a bigoted stance on Muslims that is rarely acknowledged.
* Muslim Americans are constantly blamed for not speaking up. However the media bears some responsibility. Muslims continually speak out and do positive things for American society, but this does not make it in the news. Every major national Muslim American organization has condemned acts of terror. American Muslim scholars and leaders hold conferences, talks, and lectures devoted to the topic of “Forging an American Muslim identity.”
* Where is the media when peaceful Muslims gather, participate in the American political process, and protest terrorism, violence, and hatred?
* At one point, a discussant posits a recommendation “They need to have a million man march on Washington,” while conveniently ignoring that the Million Man March was actually led by a self-proclaimed Muslim, Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam.
* On September 25, 2009, Islam on Capitol Hill gathered an estimated 8,000 to pray Friday prayers. And on October 15, 2010 thousands of Muslims once again convened on Capitol Hill to demonstrate their belief in American democracy and promote religious freedom, however, there were few media outlets at the DC event.
* Muslim Congressmen Keith Ellison wrote an Op-ed, “Should We Fear Islam?” in the Washington Post, speaking to the first point made in this section. Ellison and Muslim Congressman Andre Carson were also completely absent from the program, which brings us to an important issue of accurate portrayal of American Muslims.

2. The program re-inscribes Islam as a foreign religion by focusing on Arab and South Asian immigrant communities in the US, at the expense of African American Muslim communities.
* Your program excluded African American Muslims in the narrative of Islam in America and conflated Arab with Muslim. African Americans make up the largest percentage of Muslims in America, and yet your program visited Dearborn, MI, Patterson, NJ, and even Egypt to speak with Arabs who compose the third largest group of Muslims in the US.
* The Nation’s first capitol is also a city with a rich and long history of Muslims. There was a community of orthodox Black American and Caribbean American Muslims from the 1920s. Philadelphia is also a city with a high concentration of Muslims, a Muslim chief of police, Muslims who work in city government, etc.
* With the over-exposure of Arab Muslims, your program even failed to mention that Arab American Muslims are in the minority in Arab American communities. Most Arab Americans are Christian.
* The program did a poor job discussing, engaging with and highlighting the diverse community of Muslims.
* Low figure for Muslims (2-3 million?), and no breakdown of the demographics.
* It has also come to our attention that a number of “moderate” Muslims were in fact interviewed for this program, including most notably Dalia Mogahed, White House Advisor and Executive Director of the Gallup Center for Muslim Studies, yet their interviews were not aired. The exclusion of her voice, amongst others, and the inclusion of alarmist voices such as Ms. Geller’s is troubling and reduced the caliber, professionalism, and honest journalism that is expected of programs such as 20/20. It leaves us to question whether the issue at hand was a lack of cultural competence of our community or a desire for a certain bent that feeds into many of the vitriolic stereotypes of Muslims in post 9/11 America.
* No discussion of converts.
* The program even failed to show celebrated athletes (NFL, NBA, soccer players and boxers), politicians and historical figures who are Muslim and African American.

3. Finally, the segment, “Does Islam oppress women?” did a great disservice to Muslim women.
* While we appreciate the inclusion of one Muslim voice, Irshad Manji, she herself is not a scholar on Islam and is also considered adversarial by many Muslims.
* Instead two polemical figures who are vehement in their anti-Islam stance, Ayaan Hirsi and Pamela Gellar received undue attention.
* Your program failed to include any Muslim scholars such as Amina Wadud, Ingrid Mattson (a Canadian scholar who recently ended her term as ISNA president), or Dr. Aminah Beverly McCloud to speak in this segment. Their and other scholars’ absence is an indication of an asymmetric representation of oppositional views.
* Perhaps these scholars would have shed light on Muslim women’s contributions through history such as Islam’s first convert, Khadija al-Kubra, the Prophet Muhammad’s wife, who was also his employer before marrying. One of the first Sufi saints was a woman, Rabia al-’Adawiyya al-Qaysiyya (Rabia al-Basri) or Nana Asma’u a West African educator and reformer.

In order to explore our rich diversity, we have provided some recommendations to improve your coverage of American Muslims below:

1. Explore the long history of Muslims in the US, a history of residency and settlement that predates the formation of America as a country. As one example of many, American born Nawawi scholar Dr. Umar Faruq Abd-Allah has written extensively on this subject.
2. Include broader segments of the American Muslim community to ensure that each major race and ethnic group, South Asian American, African American, and Arab American, is represented in your programs.
3. Attend Muslim American events, banquets and conferences like the prayer on Capitol Hill, MPAC, CAIR’s functions, etc. Do not just focus on sensationalism, but cover American Muslims during Ramadan or Eid al-Adha (the end of Hajj).
4. We ask your researchers and staff to be more careful in their selection of “experts.” Make distinctions between socio-politics and Islamic scholarship. None of the women you interviewed in the question on the oppression of women in Islam had training in Islamic scholarship on covering or the hijab. We can help provide a list of scholars and experts who would be happy to lend their expertise.
5. Consider diversifying your staff, researchers and interns with knowledge, expertise, and experience in various communities may yield better results.

In summation, your program provided a rare opportunity to provide accurate coverage of Muslims and clear up misconceptions. As acknowledged at the onset of your program, the controversy surrounding the Park 51 community center elicited a renewed curiosity in Islam. We were pleased with the inclusion of Edina Lekovic’s (MPAC) and Eboo Patel’s (Interfaith YouthCore) comments, Reza Aslan’s explanation of the definition of “fatwa,” and Faiza Ali’s (CAIR-NY) elucidation of the hijab’s complex historical place in cultural and religious practice, “coerced headcoverings are tribal.” However, while we note that your program was a step in the right direction, its lack of attention to detail, and excess attention to individuals with no scholarly background, noticeably decreased the value of what your program could have and should have earned. It is apparent that the producers cut corners, did not research and were not curious to find other sources, and as a result, the piece suffered.
In light of the suggestions and criticisms we have made—ones we hope are constructive and practical—let us iterate once more that we appreciate your initiative to educate Americans about Islam. We hope you will air more programs in the years to come about Islam in America. It would be a great service to this country.
Please also note the signatories of this letter. We have the best interest of 20/20 in mind, as well as the American people in general, and would look forward to lending our services and resources in the future. Please do not hesitate to contact, and we look forward to a response to this letter.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/letter_to_iqa_producers/

The Hijab Alternative

Sarakenos — Mon, 11 Oct 2010 03:31:49 +0000

If all men were blind, would Sharia grant women the right to walk naked in the streets? It is that men have eyes that seems to be the one and only reason why the ultra-religious insist on the necessity for women to cover up. There is an elaborate dress-code that has been taught in every school in the Muslim world: men must cover everything between their naval and knees, and women must cover everything except their hands and face. Yet strangely enough, even among the ultra-religious, it would be less awkward to see a modest woman showing her hair, than to see a topless man sharing his self-admiration to his chest hair. Muslim men in the prophet’s time found it acceptable to walk around, and even enter the mosque, with long hair, make-up (henna and kohl), and wearing nothing but a white towel from waist to knees. Can you imagine such a man walking into a mosque on a Friday?

This is proof that, contrary to ultra-religious oxymoronic views, cultural norms and habits trump any religious teaching. Praying in your jeans and t-shirt in Jordan, for example, is perfectly fine. But in Sanaa, early nineties, I got stoned with pebbles and called “Amreeki” because I had jeans and t-shirt on. In China, the Chinese Imam insisted that I must put on a Chinese toga (although my attire was acceptable by Sharia) before I walked into the 1300 year-old mosque in Xi’an (The Great Mosque of Xi’an). He said that the Chinese [Muslims] would feel uncomfortable seeing me praying in trousers. Speaking of Chinese Muslims and culture trumping religious teachings, you will find that Muslim restaurants, run by devout Chinese Muslims, would not serve swine products, but are totally fine serving beer. The strict Wahhabi sect hasn’t penetrated their culture yet as it did in places as far as Bangladesh and Bosnia.

The Muslim culture in the Middle East, thanks to Saudi influence on school curricula throughout the past century, has been fixated on sex to the point where men have become almost completely relieved of any guilt related to sexual offenses, from perverted staring to rape. Instead of teaching boys that being perverted is wrong, they were taught that it is always the girl’s fault if they ever get a hard-on: If she was not wearing a short skirt, then it is because of her seductive arms. If she covers her arms, then it is because she is showing her neck and hair. If she covers her neck and hair, it is because you can still conjure the shape of her body. If she is covered from head to toe in, let’s say, a black cloak, and the man still gets a hard-on, it is because she is walking alone in public without a male companion. What is a woman, despite being covered, doing outside of her home, walking alone (or with other women)? Obviously she’s trying to seduce men and make them think of sinning! Why else would she leave her home? The slut!

This is what it has come down to. The following is an excerpt from an actual conversation I had with a taxi driver in Amman:

- “You heard about the girl who got raped by her cousin in the West Bank?”
- Taxi Driver: “No, what happened?”
- “Well, since the crime was within the same family, they decided not to go to the authorities and deal with it among themselves. They had a meeting to discuss the case and the appropriate response. The male was 26 years old, and his female cousin was four years old.”
- “Four? You mean fourteen!”
- “No, four. She was four years old. And someone in the family asked what she was wearing. He was told that she was wearing a short dress, to which he thought must have been a factor to why the young man did what he did.”
- “Disgusting! Unbelievable!”
- “Yeah, so finally, they decided to kill the young man for what he did. And that is what happened.”
- “Four years old! What a monster! I mean, had she been ten years old, I would have been understanding of his actions.”
- “What? Rape is wrong regardless of the girl’s age, you are aware of that, aren’t you?”
- “Yes, but if she was wearing a short dress, what do you expect to happen? Men have urges you know.”
- “So if she was ten years old, the guy is not guilty?”
- “Would you really blame him for the urges that God has put in him?”

Unfortunately I arrived to my destination and was thus forbidden the philosophical fruits from that sage’s vocal chords.

Why is it that women in “Godless” places like China, Korea, and Japan virtually never face sexual harassment in public, regardless of time, place, and clothes? For over five years now living in East Asia, not once have I witnessed verbal or physical harassment, not even a whistle from a construction worker to a hot girl in a night gown, walking alone, at 2:00 in the morning! Then I spend one week in Amman and hear about a dozen cases that happened just that week.

Perhaps, instead of covering every part of a woman’s body less her eyes, it would be more effective to just cover the man’s eyes. That would really solve the problem once and for all. Chastise the man who removes his blindfold in public, then no woman would ever be called a disobedient whore for stepping a foot outside her house. Here is a novel idea: How about the ultra-religious start teaching their kids that it is not OK to be publicly perverted, instead of teaching them that women who walk around without a head cover are sinful whores? For a sexually-deprived man, no amount of covers and cloaks could impede his “urges.” It’s not that the Chinese man has no urges. The difference is that when he was a kid, he was taught some manners!

Update on Mini-Skirts and Veils

Sana — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 06:27:47 +0000

A little over a week ago, I addressed some major underlying issues regarding the long debate of the position of Islam and Muslims in France (veiled in a discussion of ..well, the veil) based on the country’s own position as a post-colonial state. Just as a refresher, I discussed the the impact of France’s colonial history on its understanding and treatment of its minority populations, specifically its 5 million Muslims.

Well, the issue is back in the headlines, but this time the news serves to defeat the proposal banning the burqa. According to the popular Le Monde (The World en Francais), there are only 367 Muslim women (out of 5 million Muslims) who wear the burqa.

Statistics on how many women wear facial veils are usually not available in France, which is wary of surveys of people’s religious practices because of the ideal of equality.

This means that until now, the issue of Islamic veils has been debated with much passion but little hard evidence.

Le Monde said the intelligence reports it had seen had been passed to government and would form part of the parliamentary debate into the issue of the veils.

Critics of the idea of a ban have said it would stigmatise Islam and would put moderate Muslims on the defensive, pushing them into defending the veils as a symbol of their religion even though they may not favour wearing the garments themselves.

The intelligence reports cited by Le Monde suggest that the reality of women who cover their faces in France, and why, is quite different from the description given by politicians.

The reports say most women who wear full veils are under 30 and do so to make a political point. Outraged by what they see as widespread anti-Muslim sentiment, they want to defy society and, in some cases, their own relatives.

French converts to Islam account for around a quarter of wearers, the newspaper said, quoting the reports.

Okay, quick poll – who’s seriously shocked? Is this really that shocking? Are you shocked? Are you? Answer damnit.

While not surprising, this was needed. Beyond needed. This news has turned the faces of the supporters of the ban red. As Le Monde asks, is it necessary to impose a ban on an exception, especially at the risk of further stigmatization of Islam? The answer is, quite simply, no. It’s not necessary nor worth the political and social backlash. France is home to Europe’s biggest Muslim population, which is also, albeit arguably, the most integrated into a European country’s mainstream national culture. As I’ve previously discussed, and as also briefly mentioned in the above-linked article, France has bigger fries to bake than the choices of dress by an extremely small minority of its population. Hopefully these statistics will force French politicians to move ahead from this issue which has enraptured its politics for over a decade. Perhaps, finally, President Sarkozy’s agenda will prioritize the socio-political marginalization of minorities over the alleged impending garment danger of 367 citizens out of almost a mere 62 million.

Perhaps. Maybe.

Beyond Mini-Skirts and Veils

Sana — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 07:31:25 +0000

President Sarkozy’s recent declarations against the burqa have fallen out of the news headlines but his words are still ringing loudly within and outside Western Muslim communities. Opinion pieces and letters continue to flood international and local papers, tugging back and forth. While such debates may be painful and trivial to read and listen to by many, they must be welcomed as they bring into light a far greater issue than any all-encompassing piece of fabric. Most importantly, however, there is a dire necessity for a more intellectually sound discussion outside the common “the mini-skirt versus the veil” parable. Albeit legitimate, this comparative argument is reductionist, focusing on a superficial detail. For on thing, it does not taking into account that the question of the veil in France is beyond basic issues of the place of religion in a secular state. This is the same problem found within the monologues expressing support for the ban; monologues arguing for the universal liberation of universally oppressed Muslim women. If we are to engage in this discussion, as citizens of a multicultural secular democratic state, education on the matter becomes an obligation upon each and every one us. We must engage and we must learn to observe outside the tunnel. After all, our own society faces watered-down versions of the questions being whispered and roared amongst the French state and its populace.

In 2005, France declared that any and all “conspicuous” religious symbols would be banned from public schools. While Christian crosses and Jewish kippas also fell under the ban’s radar, its most obvious target was the hijab, a head-covering worn by many Muslim women around the world. The French state repeatedly assured the ban’s critics that the action was necessary for sustaining the country’s foundational secularism and was not meant to isolate or harass a large demographic within its citizenry. But as the home to the largest European Muslim population, it was hard for observing critics to bat their eyes in any other direction.

A thorough survey and critique of the 2005 ban was provided by Professor Joan Wallach Scott’s 2007 book Politics of the Veil. Scott explores French notions of secularism, sexuality, individualism and history, in particular putting an emphasis on the link between France’s role as a former colonial power and its current relationship with its minority populations. This role is only one part of a far more complex and multi-layered situation in which France currently finds itself. The French Revolution created a republic with ideals of equality, individualism and secularism which reflected what it meant to be French in the post-revolution period. The issue of colonial history, however, is one which deserves more attention than it has received, especially in the discussion regarding the adornment of the veil – be it in the form of the hijab or the burqa – in the French public.

Scott argues that the colonialist experience of the French in North Africa saw the veil as a symbol of both cultural and violent resistance. Algeria stood at the forefront of France’s efforts: ending France’s reach with the 1960s revolution. The adornment of the veil made the Algerian woman’s grasp to her ‘barbaric and backwards’ culture all the more apparent; she had to be unveiled for assimilation to be successful. This was, after all, in line with the imperialist European strategy of conquering a society through conquering its women first. During the revolution, however, the full veil took on a violent façade. Many men, hidden within the garment, attempted to assassinate French officials roaming the Algerian streets. This tactic proved to be successful. The veil became the physical manifestation of an entire people’s resistance to being conquered. As Franz Fanon discusses in his book The Wretched of the Earth, in the process of decolonization both the colonized and the colonizers are affected. They are no longer the same bodies of people which existed before colonization; they emerge from decolonization as partially, sometimes fully, reborn. France’s colonial experience has, thus, unsurprisingly left a legacy not only within the lands it attempted to conquer but also within the minds of the French state and populace.

The fascination with the unveiling of the woman of the so-called Near East is perhaps most perfectly depicted within the Orientalist artwork of the 18th and 19th centuries. These works portrayed themes and images which created a long-lasting impression. Many painters were unable to travel to the conquered regions, having to rely on secondhand accounts. Yet even those who were able to travel were often unable to gain access to women as models. Thus their illustrations were driven by both circumstance and self-fulfilling fantasy.

The artists collectively created a singular portrait of the Near Eastern woman as both a virgin awaiting her salvation and a seductress seeking her next willing victim. She would often be either confined within the cages of a harem, forced to perform for her bearded and overweight master or she would lounging naked in a large bath, being gently scrubbed by a black female slave. Thus, over-eroticization of the Near Eastern woman was not isolated to the oft-misunderstood harem; it was extended to all facets of her life, from the most intimate to the most familial and mundane. Additionally, her clothing deserves special observance. When clothed, her garments were often depicted as sheer and tantalizing, covering just barely enough.

The Near Eastern man was also not safe from an overly exoticized depiction; he was a man unable to treat his women in their deserving manner. He was a man who kept a strong hand on his women, who were merely his sexual properties. It was the thus the duty of the European man to save the poor women and unveil her from the precincts of the harem and home. This fantasy has persisted till this day: Muslim and Arab women are confined to a veil forced upon them by their vicious men thereby making it the duty of the Western man to come and liberate the oppressed from their chains. And just like the feminist missions of the past, the men of today come to liberate the women of ‘backwards and barbaric cultures’ forgetting the strong patriarchal structures which still exist and exploit their own societies.

France now stands at a social and political turning point. It has been unwilling to see and accept that in its post-colonial condition it is a multi-ethnic and multi-cultural society. Instead, it continues to push its homogeneous identity upon a heterogeneous populace in an effort to secure its power as a strong state. France’s ideological secularism is not the problem. Its inability to adapt to its reality is. The hijab and the burqa are not the problem. Their symbolic throwback to history is, as are the rigid structures and understandings of equality, sexuality and individualism.

Banning an article of clothing, which is both chosen and unfortunately sometimes also forced, does not provide any solution to the attack France sees coming from the nearby horizon. Such a ban only acts as its own resistance to the reality of its changing face. French Muslims, who have been living within the country for generations, consider themselves French above all else. Yet they are consistently told – socially, politically and economically – otherwise. The 2005 riots, by angry young men of immigrant origins is testament to the alienation and discrimination felt by those who have lived in France for two or three generations. These young men are no longer considered natives of the lands from which their forefathers came and at the same time are not considered to be “actually” French by those who are French “enough.”

By targeting how a small number of French women choose to assert and represent their sexuality, France is missing the real sources of the problem as well as implying that its foundation is perhaps far less stable than what it would like the world and its own citizenry to think. It is now time for France not to shed the various components of its identity, but rather to approach those very pieces with a broader outlook. Its minority population has been willing to adapt for decades, but can France accept minimal equity as a basis for greater equality as we have done so here in North America?

Mr. Sarkozy, your efforts may be sincere; you are, after all, only trying to protect the criteria for what makes one“French” enough. Remember, however, that in your attempt to free woman from her draping chains, you restrict her sexuality, her own sense of her individualism and her being to the confines of your harem by dictating the dance she must do and the garments she must wear to please you.

Poor Alternatives

Peppermint Patty — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 19:46:09 +0000

Anne Applebaum, liberal-ish Washington Post and Slate correspondent, former-USSR expert, and wife of the Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs, recently published the most ridiculous op-ed of all time, entitled “Morocco, an Alternative to Iran.” On Slate, it was published as “Morocco Makes Peace With Its Past” (perhaps even more proposterous), and I perhaps wouldn’t have noticed it had it not linked to a piece of mine on Global Voices which, quite neutrally, reported on the recent election of Marrakesh’s first female mayor.

Applebaum’s piece is problematic for a number of reasons aside from the obvious (which is to say that, while shooting protesters and clamping down on free speech are fundamentally wrong, the elections themselves are still contested). From the opening paragraph, in which she invokes the all-too-common cliché of non-headscarf wearing Muslims “[not looking] out of place in New York or Paris” to her claims of Morocco entering a new era of democracy, Applebaum demonstrates her total ignorance of the Maghreb and the Arab world on the whole.

Take this sentence, for example:

“…unlike most of its Arab neighbors, the country has over the last decade undergone a slow but profound transformation from traditional monarchy to constitutional monarchy, acquiring along the way real political parties, a relatively free press, new political leaders—the mayor of Marrakesh is a 33-year-old woman—and a set of family laws that strives to be compatible both with sharia and international conventions on human rights.”

Anyone with an iota of knowledge on Moroccan politics can see the flaws in this paragraph; from the recent elections, in which the newly created Modernity and Authenticity Party, or P.A.M. (dubbed the “King’s Party”), closely linked to the royal palace, managed to sweep 22,158 seats to the three journalists arrested and fined for insulting the tyrannical leader of Libya, it doesn’t take a genius to see that Morocco is not a prime example of democracy, nor a model for Iranian reform.

In fact, Morocco’s own human rights record is deeply flawed. Despite substantial changes from the “Years of Lead,” Morocco continues to oppress Saharawi citizens (be their true nationality Moroccan or Saharawi, it should be relatively undisputed that they are not treated well by the state), suppress Amazigh activists by outlawing their language in schools and requiring their children be given Arab names even abroad, and persecute converts to other religions. Furthermore, Morocco almost certainly harbors CIA rendition sites, as has been testified by former Guantanamo inmates, and almost always turns the other cheek to Israeli and United States imperialism.

Applebaum also brazenly suggests that perhaps, had the Iranian revolution not occurred, perhaps Iran could have followed a similar path to Morocco, saying, “One thinks wistfully of the shah of Iran and of what might have been.” It’s as if she forgets, or is completely unaware, of the human rights violations and general atmosphere of oppression under Pahlavi.

Lastly, Applebaum’s assertion that “the Arab world lacks the political will to change” reeks of Obamania. Doubtless there are a number of Arab countries in which rigged elections, oppression of citizenry, and lack of freedoms are rampant, but the meme that democracy and capitalism are the only way (not to mention the United States’ hypocritical views toward democratic elections in the Middle East) is getting old. Change, if it is to happen, needs to come from within, and will not occur thanks to Western journalists, nor Twitter users changing their icons green, nor United States imperialism.

Chaim Sends Greetings from Iran

Programmer Buydatti — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 02:50:54 +0000

It’s not a well-guarded secret that resident KABOBfest Arabist Chaim Sugarman has a fetish for hijab-wearing women. Point in case: While in Iran to show his support for the country’s seventh party candidate, Koskol, he sent the KABOBfest listserv the following short email and picture…

SHALOM guys! THis achichem CHAIM! I’m on holiday for suport of Koskol! ! KOSKOL ’09 FOR CHANGE ! ! And and see the ROMORS are REAL of the BABES! omG-D guys so man Persain girls are nice for the touch! THIS Is place is Heaven for bocher like ME>>> :p CHik out this BABe I find when smoking hubbly with MY FRIENdS Omar and Hussein. W@@W! May b I 2 find her on FACEBOOK

Feel free to return Chaim’s greeting by posting something nice on his Facebook wall: www.Facebook.com/bigchaim69

Iraqi Muhajabeh Character on ATWT

Maytha — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 09:17:00 +0000

How did this ludicrous, crown jewel of a TV storyline concocted by the good people at As the World Turns (ATWT) fall under my nose?

This As the World Turns storyline, which aired first aired February 22nd of this year, focuses on a mutually beneficial relationship. Ameera Ali Aziz (AAA), an Iraqi native college student, needs a visa to stay in school, and classmate, makes the friendly gesture of marrying Ameera to keep her in the country. Noah feels indebted to Ameera because his estranged father, an US colonel, was in a relationship with Ameera’s mother during his service in Iraq (I know, I know, strange as it is, remind yourselves that it is a soap opera). This marriage also helps to Noah rake up some socially viable good samaritan/humanitarian points. However, the relationship and immigration investigations wear on the Noah’s relationship with the jealous and skeptical Luke. But, there is a point of shared lived experience that both the marginalized queer male and the re/oppressed Arab Muslim woman relate to each other on:

“You don’t realize your freedom until you lose it.”

See the drama (and in my opinion comedic hijinks) ensue for yourself:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cOKcGnkh8c]

Watch around minute 2 for the juiciness to start pouring:

An immigration inspector’s check-up on the relationship and raid on their living quarters addresses the legitimacy of their marriage. The ICE officer informs Ameera that he, “discovered you and your husband don’t share a bed.”

UH OH! They’re really caught in a quagmire! But, what to do? How to explain??? They employ one of my favorite oriental essentialist claims to explain this potentially incriminating observation:

“In Ameera’s culture, relations between a man and woman are discrete and I respect that.”

What is this? I Love Lucy redux? America’s sugar-coated fifties fantasies re-hashed for the 21st century’s daytime TV crowd?

To continue to follow the storyline, just simply visit youtube and perform a search on ”ATWT and Ameera.” Most of the episodes are there.

“I doubt more than 1 in 100 Muslim women wear hijab here. It’s probably close to the opposite in their home countries…

Maytha — Sun, 24 Aug 2008 15:18:00 +0000

So if it is really all about choice, why do the same women make different choices, depending on where they live?
-A frequent KABOBfest message board commentator commenting on a conversation sparked by I post I wrote concerning the Bahraini 200 meter olympic competitor (Ruqaya Al-Ghasara), who was fully covered from head to toe for her races.

I bring up this comment to illustrate the still too commonly-held belief that a majority of Arab Muslim women are “forced” either legally or as a result of social pressures and norms to veil. Now, let’s apply this “99 in 100 Muslim women wear the hijab in their home country” formula to a relatable situation.

Of the three Bahraini female athletes competing in the olympics:

Bahraini Track Athlete

Bahraini Swimmer

Two Bahraini athletes have elected not to wear the veil! Gasp-do you mean that countries and people are more complicated than what we see on the small and silver screens-AND that there is actually a diverse display of modesty and way of dressing??? Of course this is an exceptionally small sample size, but at the very least it should speak to the complexity of veiling, and how inaccurate these perceptions of the Arab and Muslim world are when they box a people in a society’s behavior into one category.

Songs From Above (as in satellite TV)

Nimr — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:08:00 +0000

The LA Times has an article on Syrian singer Hossam Haj and his new song “Let Us Pray Together, Sweetheart.” Haj got famous for his last jam, “Get Your Hijab On!”. Haj is the latest in a growing list of ~~self~~ righteous singers. While I kinda dug the work of Sami Yusuf and could tolerate guys like Ahmed Bukhatir this trend feels soooo 2006 to me. While some of the clips give the classic religious-pop message of “faith makes your life better/meaningful” what I find interesting is how many of these clips are still basically love songs and concentrate so much on romantic relationships. The cynic in me also wonders how many of these guys at this point are just jumping on the latest trend. I am still waiting for one of them to have an R-Kelly moment….”Welcome to the Kunefe Factory!“

While I have a well documented love of hot/sassy/athletic women in hijabs, I find little girls in the headscarf to be kind of creepy. I hate the scene in the Haj video where he gives the newly minted mini-muhajibah chocolate as a reward. I also think the “I am going to lightly touch your hijab” move is a bit creepy too. Here is the hijab video from Haj:

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oR7-HbxV-Ew]