In 2004 Theo Van Gogh was murdered in the street of his beloved Amsterdam by an Islamic man furious at the movie "Submission" Van Gogh had produced with Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a former Muslim woman from Somalia. The movie was about defiance, about Muslim women and the oppression and abuse they suffer under the precepts of the Quran. Muhammad Bouyeri shot Theo and after Theo begged, "Can't we talk about this?" Bouyeri shot him 4 more times and sawed Theo's throat with a knife then stabbed a 5 page letter onto the dying man's chest. The letter threatened Western Governments, Jews and Ayaan who had to go into hiding. Van Gogh was the great grandson of Theo Van Gogh, Vincents brother.
The moment was a defining one for Holland. They finally realized that their western values were incompatible with the Islamic faith practiced by the many Muslims in Holland. It set the country on fire. As Hirsi Ali says, "Opinion makers were now saying that it was irresponsible and indeed morally wrong to pretend that appeasing Islamic leaders would magically lead to social harmony. Dutch society was churninng with discussion over how to best integrate Muslims, and Muslims in Holland also seemed largely aware now that they needed to choose between Western values and the old ways."
The freedom of expression that liberated Hirsi Ali once she moved to Holland is unknown in most if not all theocratic Islamic countries. Theo's murderer and others like him don't realize how deeply people in the West are committed to the idea of an open society, she points out. Even though open societies are vulnerable, they are stubborn. It is the place where she ran for safety and freedom and she wants to keep it that way: safe and free.
Hirsi Ali grew up in a culture of death in Somalia, Saudi Arabia and Kenya. She wrote in her book "Infidel" that "death lures many to take their own lives in order to escape the dismal reality. For many women, because of the perception of lost honor, death comes at the hands of a father, brother or husband. Wishful thinking about the peaceful tolerance of Islam, she points out, cannot interpret away this reality: hands are still cut off, women still stoned and enslaved.
Ayaan has made this her lifes purpose: to educate those of us who are free that we in the West would be wrong to prolong the pain of transition unnecessarily, by elevating cultures full of bigotry and hatred toward women to the stature of respectable alternative ways of life.
The fact is that hundreds of millions of women around the world live in forced marriages, and six thousand small girls are excised every day. As was Hirsi Ali. With a pair of scissors wielded by a local religious man while being held down by adults.
The apologists for militant Islam do the West no favors when they run in with their politically correct mega-phones directing us all on what to think when another Muslim commits terror and murder in the name of his religion. The apologists for militant Islam do the Muslim faith no favors when they tamp down much needed discussion on how we in the West are to cope with a population that has gone through no reformation and often does not seek to assimilate in the country that opened its doors to them, but instead to take it over. The next time you see a woman in a burqa shopping, ask her if she was excised as a girl. Ask her what level of education she was allowed to achieve. Ask her if she was forced into her marriage. The women of the West have fought too hard and too long to be "free" to throw it all away by calling the oppression and abuse of millions of women in the name of religion just another lifestyle choice.
It is oppression and abuse.
We in the West are a tolerant people. Freedom of speech is protected by our constitution. Religious freedom in protected by our constitution. And women have been liberated, to run their own lives. All three of these are in direct conflict with strict Islam. You are not allowed to criticize or even question Islamic precepts. They tolerate no religion but their own. And women are subjugated with no voice or power either within the religious arena or at home. Peaceful Muslims are just as victimized as the rest of us by strict Islamists. [Writer Heather Michon points out that Islamic feminism is on the rise in the Muslim world and Europe is going to play a huge part in that development.]
Even American muslims who have grown up in America enjoying the perks and benefits of an open society, such as Major Hasan and his Imam, dare to embrace the belief that Islamic law trumps the U.S. Constitution. This sets up a dangerous conflict because
We are not a theocracy. The goal of a global Islamic Government is incompatible with religious tolerance.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali made her mark in Holland. She pushed through legislation that caused the Dutch government to register murders in that country based on honor killings and to register the domestic violence, sexual abuse and incest and the number of excisions of little girls taking place every year on Dutch kitchen tables. The Dutch government registered the number of drug-related killings and traffic accidents every year but not the number of honor killings because no Dutch official wanted to recognize that this kind of murder happened on a regular basis. Once these figures were clear, the facts alone shocked the country and helped her reach the goal of eliminating the complacent attitude of moral relativists who claimed all cultures are equal. She took away the excuse that nobody knew.
The creeping in of Shari'a law is incompatible with Western values. It is mainly muslim men in England who stridently demand to follow only Shari'a law instead of the laws of England, much to the horror of Islamic women who have fled brutal theocracies to escape Shari'a so they might attend universities and not marry if they wish and not be killed for being raped. And part of that creeping Shari'a law that is marking itself in free countries is the criminalization of religious talk and discourse if it involves Islam. That is Shari'a law. In our country Christians and Jews, Catholics and Baptists [and Hare Krishna's] are routinely debated, ridiculed and admired at various times and by various factions. Islam does not get a pass in a free society, which becomes un-free once freedom of speech is suppressed.
As a free society it is our duty to engage in vigorous discourse on the violence in our country being perpetuated on the innocent in the name of Islam. We are not the ones who are bringing up religion. When you shout "Allahu Akbar" before engaging in murder, you bring religion to the table. Now is not the time to apologize or wish away the realities. Now is the time to confront and hold feet to the fire: we have shed literal blood, sweat and tears to form a more perfect union, an open society that relishes its freedoms. And we won't be held hostage to the notion we must tolerate the intolerable.
There are times when silence becomes an accomplice to injustice. Or as Winston Churchill put it: "The malice of the wicked is reinforced by the weakness of the virtuous." Unfortunately, Theo Van Gogh learned that the hard way.


Salon.com
Comments
This is so true, you see not just socially-acceptable problems that were solved 15 years ago, but new problems that most people don"t have the courage to bring up.
Bravo Deborah, and please keep writing. You voice is needed here and elsewhere.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,654704,00.html
Quite interesting. I've never heard a hymen described as a form of capital before.
Rated.
How do you deal with someone who immigrates to your country, then refuses to obey your laws? Can you only deport the oppressors? Will truly religious families allow themselves to be broken up over their new country's laws?
My parents came to the USA from South America when I was an infant... but they were eager to adopt the American way of life and eventually rejected their religious upbringing (Baptist). Although they wouldn't have been able to come here without the church sponsorship, they didn't feel they had to continue to hold on to old beliefs about how life should be. I'm wondering what makes others so reluctant to adopt their new country's ways and hang on to archaic, gruesome customs.
Should be on the cover.
At the top.
The reasons that Christian women's lives have changed more than Muslim women's is more political than religious, because their communities have and had more contact with the west and its values, and a western education. The most oppressive Muslim societies are the most isolated; where change has come suddenly and is threatening. Change in Afghanistan has meant invasion after all; change in Iran was also forced with Reza Shah and followed by a brutal dictatorship. It's easy for people in that position to cling to their enshrined cultural values (in the form of religion) when their entire way of life is threatened, even if for reasons that have nothing to do with religion.
Another example is honor killings among tribal Kurds and Arabs; they tend to happen more in big cities outside their home regions than in them. It is people who grew up in another world culturally speaking, within a set of values that was not questioned, reacting to change they are not equipped to deal with.The big fear and threat is not what God will think of what their daughter may have done, but what their tribal society will think of them as a family. Christian honor killings were not all that rare in Greece even 50 years ago, and they aren't even a tribal society.
As for asking yourself whether a woman in a burka has been excised: the answer is almost certainly "no she hasn't been," because female "circumcision" is not practiced in Afghanistan. The equating of female genital mutilation with Islam is a dishonest smear, and a truly tired one as well.
What I do see as more of a threat is the foisting of fundamentalist Islam on other Islamic communities. In Turkey for example, as well as other countries, many are concerned that the fundmentalist brand of Islam becoming more common there is a pushing of Arab culture on people with a very, very different underlying culture. I believe a lot of this is also reaction to very quick change that people don't know how to assimilate, combined with lack of education. It's not much different than poorly educated Bible Belt Christians in the US fighting to get creationism taught in schools, shooting doctors who perform abortions or believing gays are slaves of Satan. But few people single out Christianity as being incompatible with feminism. Fundamentalist Christians can get whipped into a tizzy as easily as fundamentalist Muslims; the difference is in the proportion of such believers within their societies.
Ates: "Particularly here in Germany, there are some very deep archaic self-images -- including those among leftist German feminist women -- of the whites who behave like big sisters. It's very arrogant. These women rail against the Catholic Church and its rigid sexual morals, but they insist that we tolerate Turkish women wearing the headscarf, because they believe that this enables the women to preserve their culture. But as far as I'm concerned, this headscarf is nothing but an expression of oppression and inhibition, and of the fact that the men would prefer to hide the women."
Ates herself is a Muslim woman. She describes as I do the double-standard of criticizing Christianity but the forced self-censorship of criticizing Islam.
The Islamic culture has adapted itself to some degree, in order to exist in the US. Extremism is the true culprit, as it denies basic human rights to women and advocates violence against non-conformists. In my mind, there is a distinction that, apart from feminism, encompasses the basic freedoms of all to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
I just don't get it, Millitant muslims cry and whine, saying they hate the west, but how many come here to the US every year? Sorry, you can't have it both ways.
Thanks for this Deb.
Rated
In Guinea, Sexual Violence Fails To Silence Women
I listened to the reporter of this story at lunch...came back and read your post...really puts life in the US in grateful persceptive...Thanks!
I lived as a muslim woman for years and although I didn't wear the burka, I did wear the hijab.
Re the stoning...nowhere in the Quran, which is where the shariah comes from, does it advocate the stoning of adulterers. It's not even mentioned.
I read Ali's book and have followed her story, as well as Theo van Gogh's. I guess we always have to keep coming back to this: Is our beef with Islam itself or with Islamic extremism. Much of what you propose here as fact (You are not allowed to criticize or even question Islamic precepts. They tolerate no religion but their own. And women are subjugated with no voice or power either within the religious arena or at home. Peaceful Muslims are just as victimized as the rest of us by strict Islamists.) has been disputed elsewhere as not true for mainstream Muslims. You pepper your essay with modifiers like "strict" and "militant" in front of Islam, and you mention extremists, so I am left to ponder if we are to interpret Islam itself as antithetical to Western values or just to extreme Islam. I don't know where the boundaries lie.
It's vogue around where I live to claim that there are no moderate Muslims. I can't say as I can offer anecdotal evidence to dispute that. I live in a suburb of Cleveland that is somewhat populated with Middle Eastern immigrants, but I can't say that I've ever asked them about their religious practices. I do see women wearing head scarves. Should I assume, knee-jerk fashion, that this means they are being discriminated against? Is there room for them to choose this on their own the way us Catholics wore little doilies on our heads in church years ago? Or the way nuns chose to dress in habits? Some would argue that those choices weren't as willingly made as they seem, either.
I hosted an Irananian movie night at my house two years ago, and a conservative Muslim couple from Syria came. I didn't know them well (It's a convoluted story as to how they ended up being invited) but they managed to inadvertently highjack the evening by preventing the rest of us from drinking alcohol, manipulating the place and time where we watched the films--to accommodate the husband's praying, which was awkward to witness, frankly--and speaking for his wife when some of us asked about the head covering. For what it's worth, he said--as she sat there nodding along--that the women are NOT forced to wear the head covering but that it's a choice if you want to be pious in the religion. He kept coming back to that, that nobody is making them wear them, that they are choosing it themselves in order to honor the strict interpretation of their holy book.
Anyway, the evening did nothing to make me feel good about Islam. I ask all my questions because freedom of speech is such an important issue to me.
I'm wondering if you think there should be any specific legislation to curtail the practice of Islam in this country, or if you are calling for a cultural dissuasion from it.
I like hummus, and I don't care what anyone says.
There. I feel better. How about you?
That is just beyond rude. Don't people (in general) have manners anymore?
they can't just leave us alone
islam needs to change
I think we need to learn from Holland and also from England that vigorous discourse is necessary in our country to protect the innocent and move forward. The creeping in of Shari'a law that criminalizes any negative discussion of Islam is frightening in a free society that holds religious tolerance and free speech as cornerstones of an open society. We cannot be held hostage with fear of terrorism or fatwahs, or the fantasy by moral relativists that all cultures are equal. Political correctness is suppressing authentic discussion in our country. Values are important.
As for the head scarves issue, I have really thought about this and there are certainly women who claim that they are making this choice on their own. There are people who begin practicing strict Islam as adults after having been raised in a western culture. What are we to do with these examples? If we assume that they aren't *really* choosing this, that they are in some way brainwashed into it, then we are going down the slippery slope of arrogance that I think many people do when they rail against the McDonald's restaurants in Bangladesh (or wherever). (Like we are the arbiter of good taste, like we are the ones who should protect these people from the food that they apparently like well enough to support). Still, I can find myself arguing the opposing side on other issues, like drugs and crime among the poor. They can't really help it, given their circumstances; they are "forced" into making these choices because of cultural pressures. See? I can do it too. So I'm not criticizing, I'm just thinking out loud and appreciating the complexity of this problem.
LadyMiko--that Iranian film night was surreal. It's a long story, but I meant to suggest that I capitulated on those things because it felt weird and rude not to, and it all came up in ways that had the rest of us just acquiescing. If I'd said, for example, "Well, I didn't realize you had any dietary restrictions that affected what others actually are allowed to drink, so I think I may need to allow others to drink the wine if they'd like" or something like that, then I know nobody at the party would have chosen to drink the wine anyway, knowing that it would cause this other couple (whom they didn't know at all, and didn't know that I didn't know well) to leave. It was awkward in the extreme. I really should blog about it b/c it was one of the weirdest nights of my life.
We do need to talk about it more but the evidence really speaks for itself. Sometimes in thinking we are too smart we refuse to see what is in front of us.
That is the way it should be. IMHO :)
I know I don't know much, but I did attend a mosque for a while. Most of those women, first of all, would be offended if you started talking offhand about being 'excised.' Most of those women would be be offended if you assumed they did not want to wear their hair covered (of course, there are different versions of this and different degrees). Is a nun oppressed if she chooses to wear a habit? She does so from her religious beliefs. Muslim women are often oppressed, but we would have to get to know the individuals to see if their dress makes them feel as if they are in a blessed, protected state or in prison. The ones I knew believed the former. I am not kidding. We can't assume to know. Sadly, in so many countries, we have virtually no contact with these women, so I can only speak about those in America.
Here is a New York Times article about Muslim women in Muslim countries who are trying to champion more liberal interpretations of the Koran.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/16/world/asia/16iht-women.1.20210920.html
Some excerpts:
"Anwar argues that the edict, issued late last year by the National Fatwa Council of Malaysia, is pure patriarchy. Islam, she says, is only a cover."
"The advocates came from 47 countries to participate in the project, called Musawah, the Arabic word for equality. They spent the weekend brainstorming and learning the best Islamic arguments to take back to their own societies as defenses against clerics who insist that women's lives are dictated by men's strict interpretations of Islam."
Maybe helping the women help themselves and supporting them as they redefine the irculture is the best way. They need a room of their own (and I don't mean that part of the mosque restricted to women that I used to sit in. :) )
I guess it starts with listening.
Of course forced marriage and excision of young girls and the continued oppression of women is still very much alive and very much a part of the practice of Islam. For us to sit here in our comfortable Western world and declare it otherwise is ludicrous. We should be up in arms about the invasion and encroachment upon our country and its laws, rather than ridiculously trying to "make peace" with a culture and religion that has no interest in conforming to the mores of a society it chooses to inhabit, but instead seeks to introduce its own "values" and restrictions on that society.
We have become so complacent and accommodating that we very well may be the instrument of our own destruction. If not that, then certainly not the defenders of an oppressed humanity crying out for, at the very least, our understanding and hopefully our aid.
Well done, Deborah.
Rated.
Female circumcision has nothing to do with Islam and isn't practiced in any Arab or Asian muslim countries that I know of.
Not true. In Egypt (the largest Arab muslim country), for example, the rate is 96%!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_cutting#Prevalence
Re the stoning...nowhere in the Quran, which is where the shariah comes from, does it advocate the stoning of adulterers. It's not even mentioned.
Also not true.
http://muttaqun.com/adultery.html
Deborah, you should revise this post and replace the words "Islam," "Sharia Law" with the words "Religious Fundamentalists" or "Islamists," or "militant Islamists."
Otherwise, any yahoo with knowledge of theology or history will start calling you a right wing religious fundamentalist bigot.
With the frequent use of the word "Islam" in your post, you sound like Pope Urban II recruiting Christians who Killed millions of Arab Christians, Jews and Muslims. The same rhetoric killed millions of Muslims in the Philippines, Serbia, Iraq and Afghanistan recently. It is the same rhetoric that Hitler used to kill six million Jews.
Your whole argument is about one crazy asshole, same as the asshole who killed MLK and the asshole who crippled Larry Flynt.
Did these two assholes and the crusaders and Hitler shout "Allahu Akbar" before they killed millions? Oops, I forgot, they were all Christians.
Peace.
Female circumcision has been banned in Egypt for the last 12 years. Both Muslim and Christians practiced it as a cultural thing. Here's a piece of an article on female circumcision in Egypt from BBC, which I find to be more reputable than wikipedia:
"The country's top religious authorities also expressed unequivocal support for the ban.
The Grand Mufti and the head of the Coptic Church said female circumcision had no basis either in the Koran or in the Bible.
Recent studies have shown that some 90% of Egyptian women have been circumcised.
The practice is common among Muslim as well as Christian families in Egypt and other African countries, but is rare in the Arab world. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6251426.stm
The second link that you posted mentions stoning in hadith, not the Quran. Hadith are sayings of the Islamic prophet and were collected after Muhammad died and the Quran was complete. Apparently, only 40 of the thousands collected are accepted by all muslims as genuine teachings.
Grand writing.
Rated.
Grand writing.
Rated.
No it is not. What you are talking about is a backwater deliberate misinterpretation of ONE word in the Surah that suits the barbaric culture of these God-forsaken tribes.
Moreover, if you insist on proving me wrong, which will never happen, you are condemning millions of Muslim women who do not wear this SHIT to hell.
I do belive that the moderate musalman has to step up to the plate and demand explanations of their irresponsible militant conservative faction . It cna perhaps only be corrected from within.
Peer review is the only way to have corrections made from within a group who understands and emotes and shares the past present and future of the people. Anything that is taught from outside either by force or charity or even with love will probably fail.
It seems an apt expression even today, though at the time it referred to aerial bombardment. The sentiment seems the same.
The passage of the speech from which this phrase originates is also eerily prophetic in a manner, when considered in a modern context:
"I think it is well also for the man in the street to realise that there is no power on earth that can protect him from being bombed. Whatever people may tell him, the bomber will always get through, The only defence is in offence, which means that you have to kill more women and children more quickly than the enemy if you want to save yourselves...If the conscience of the young men should ever come to feel, with regard to this one instrument [bombing] that it is evil and should go, the thing will be done; but if they do not feel like that – well, as I say, the future is in their hands. But when the next war comes, and European civilisation is wiped out, as it will be, and by no force more than that force, then do not let them lay blame on the old men. Let them remember that they, principally, or they alone, are responsible for the terrors that have fallen upon the earth."
(from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Baldwin)
And it is also interesting to note that his successor was Neville "There will be peace in our time" Chamberlain who knew a thing or two about appeasement, though unfortunately for him and much of Europe, mainly in the retrospective.
You may be on to something.
Personally I see nothing wrong with giving a women a caning of 20 or 30 strokes if she goes out in public immodestly attired. That would certainly make her think twice about pulling a stunt like that again. America would be much better off if Sharia law were imposed on us.
http://www.submission.org/efarsi/arabic/sura24.html
Or grab an English Quran and check for yourself. The punishment for adultery is lashings for both parties if they don't repent.
Thoth, I'm not condemning anyone to hell. Do you see a hijab in my avatar? The Quran says what it says - it's a lot clearer in Arabic. There's no punishment mentioned for not wearing it.
1. Female circumcision is not an Islamic practice and is in fact outlawed, which I think I've proven.
2. If a woman chooses to wear the hijab because her religion tells her to, it's really not anyone's business but her own. I support that choice, just like I support the freedom of choice for all women.
Probably just some hyperbole to sell more newspapers or get more clicks on their website.
Likewise for any Christians who are against the efforts of fundamentalists to take away rights of gays, or who support those who shoot abortion doctors. Is every Christian responsible for what they do? What can they do but state that they oppose it and live in the way they see right?
There is not one "Islamic" movement, there are many; there are extremists and there are many more who simply live their lives the best way they see fit. Obviously there are some despicable people in Islam and some terrible things done in its name.
If you wrote such a thing about "Judaism" because of what is going on in Palestine, or about "Christianity" because of ethnic cleansing in Serbia and Bosnia, you would simply be called a bigot. And you can be sure that there are plenty of Muslims there who feel that way about Christians and Christianity.
Are you personally responsible for what Milosevic did?
Just like with other religions, there are followers who believe in tolerance and justice. There are others who believe that everything is black and white. They believe they are right and everyone else is wrong.
I think kipouros has a real point here. Christianity abused women for hundreds of years. In some fundamentalist groups, women are still seen as second class.
I am extremely proud of Ayaan Hirsi Ali. She is a true feminist and a truly brave and liberated woman. She is my new heroine. I am so glad you told her story.
I do not think that more fear and violence will bring any good to the women of Islamic countries. I think education is the key. Islam began as a religion of the poor, women, orphans, and the oppressed. There are still good Islamic people today. They just don't get the headlines.
GENEVA — Four years after cartoons of the prophet Muhammad set off violent protests across the Muslim world, Islamic nations are mounting a campaign for an international treaty to protect religious symbols and beliefs from mockery — essentially a ban on blasphemy that would put them on a collision course with free speech laws in the West."
This is the type of thinking that Hiirsi Ali is troubled by. Do moderate/liberal believers of Islam treat women better? And can you show me that?
One of the O.S. writers here who read this, PMed her own experience. Her daughters' best friend is a daughter of an American woman and a Pakistani Islamic man. The mom left her kids with him after realizing what she had gotten herself into. Unfortunately, the girls were then excised, he married an Islamic woman and she and her daughters all wear burqa's and all the girls are excised and they live here in the United States. They are considered moderate/liberal muslims by most standards. He lives and works here and is raising his family here. Her daughters' friend escaped the family, her father does not talk to her and in order to visit her sisters, she must wear a burqa. In the U.S. They are peaceful. But for a woman, there is no peace. Do not treat the excision of young girls as an acceptable alternative lifestyle. You have no idea how many are here living in the U.S.
According to human rights advocates and service providers, families in the U.S. who have immigrated from countries where female genital mutilation (FGM) is practiced often take their daughters home, when school is out, to be cut.
Yes, FGM is practiced -- or at least planned -- on U.S. soil, on girls in immigrant families who were born and/or raised here. Perhaps even among people you know: Not long ago, a concerned mother posted on my Brooklyn-area parenting list-serv that she believed an eight-year-old friend of her daughter's had undergone some form of the procedure in her home country in the Middle East (and appeared to be markedly traumatized).
From an article on Big Salon today.