I’d rather have a Dianic Sisterhood
I haven’t commented on the Egyptian situation, since I don’t really have any special insight to offer. But I was over at another blog and was struck by how different my viewpoint on the uprising is from American men’s. Men think the issue is all about Egyptian “self-determination” and America’s interests and terrorism.
For me, the issue is women.
That’s the issue for me with every revolution, every uprising. Are there women involved? I scan the photographs to see if women are participating, to see how they’re dressed. What will happen to women’s rights? Will the new regime be more or less patriarchal than the old? Is there any chance in hell of a real democracy, or will all the people doing the self-determining be men?
Forgive me for not being too enthused about the Fraternity of Godbags that’s currently dominating the opposition in Egypt. I’m sorry; “Muslim Brotherhood.”* They’re fairly moderate as far as Islamist organizations go, but still. The last thing women need is more fundamentalist godbags.
*“A Christian Copt or a woman cannot be president of a Muslim nation,” said Shosha, a broad-shouldered man, who sat in the Brotherhood’s headquarters in Cairo watching the protests on TV. “This is a religious point, not a political one. But it will be the Muslim leader’s role to protect the rights of Copts and women.”
Oh goody!
18 Responses to “I’d rather have a Dianic Sisterhood”
-
Lexia says:
Wanna bet that just as soon as -any- sisterhood emerged as a legitimate religion, that ole progressive primacy of religious freedom would be dropped like a hot potato?
It’s only beaten to death now because the surface issue, religion, is all on the side of men. Like the liberal defense of “sexuality” – it always means the 100 tilted in favor of men status quo. Can you imagine progressives passionately defending a sexual status quo in which women are the invisible subjects and men the public ubiquitous objects? Can you imagine any of the same progressives defending any religion that privileged women the way the Catholic, Mormon, Southern Baptist and Islamic religions privilege men?
January 31st, 2011 at 9:49 pm EST -
quixote says:
“That’s the issue for me with every revolution, every uprising. Are there women involved?”
Yup. Me too.
When did it happen that the self-determination of over half the population stopped registering as relevant to self-determination?
-
Violet Socks says:
When did it happen that the self-determination of over half the population stopped registering as relevant to self-determination?
I’m thinking Sumer, 4000 B.C.
-
tinfoil hattie says:
Thank you for this. I am not all on the OMG EGYPT! GO EGYPT! bandwagon precisely because I too scan the photos and coverage, and I see: men. And any opposition party that has religion as its basis will be bad for women.
-
anna says:
“A Christian Copt or a woman cannot be president of a Muslim nation.”
News to Benazir Bhutto (prime minister of Pakistan), Megawati Sukarnoputri (president of Indonesia), Khaleda Zia and Sheikh Hasina (prime ministers of Bangladesh) and Tansu Çiller (prime minister of Turkey). All those are Muslim-majority countries.
Yes, I know what he meant. But for the record.
-
quixote says:
Too true.
-
votermom says:
What I see happening on many blogs is that they fall into black and white thinking when viewing something like this. Like there is this primal urge to pick a side and root for it. Since Mubarak is an obvious villain (and he is) then bloggers start viewing the opposition as wholly good.
Or if a blogger is deeply pro-Israel, and realize that the Mubarak has held peace with Israel for 30 years, then his opposition becomes deeply sinister and suspect.
We all look at it through our own tinted glasses, and it’s good to acknowledge upfront what color one’s own glasses are, and try to see a more complete picture despite that.
But it’s sad that so few of us happen to be wearing the glasses that tint towards women’s rights. -
MB not the force in Egypt that FOX, CNN, et al makes them out to be « Blue Lyon says:
[...] again, what Violet said. For me, the issue is [...]
-
N. says:
Violet, you might find this interesting… Demographer Richard Cincotta says something similar at the end of this post on Tunisia’s political changes:
“But if you’re watching, do some political demography of your own: Demonstrations that feature young women, the middle-aged, and perhaps even entire families, are a sign that democracy is on its way. Crowds entirely dominated by young men and boys – the social remnant of Tunisia’s waning youth bulge – tell a different story.”
-
anna says:
“A Christian Copt or a woman cannot be president of a Muslim nation,”
News to Pakistan, Bangladesh, Turkey, and Indonesia.
-
Barbara A says:
The issue for me too is are there women involved. I looked at some footage today. There were some women, but they were few and far between.
-
Violet Socks says:
There are women in the Egyptian protests, definitely. And that’s a good sign. But of course that’s not all there is to it. There is a very long road between the initial protests and who ends up in charge at the end of a revolution—any revolution.
-
djmm says:
Violet, well said. There were women protesting against the Shah of Iran as well. The Ayatollah promised freedom of religion, press and for women before he took power. And an aide joked with him about it in front of a reporter who had not confided he spoke Farsi.
I am hopeful, but worried. The Muslim Brotherhood was suspected of assassinating President Nasar and Sadat. A key member masterminded blowing up the TC the first time and resides in a US federal prison. I now hear they are milktoast, but I have heard the same from ex-boyfriends. Call me skeptical.
djmm
-
Grace says:
History has shown that not even revolutions allegedly based on marxist principles brought consistent and long-lasting changes in relation to women’s rights. Real change will never take place unless a feminist agenda is included from the beginning and as part of a political platform, instead of being subsumed under vague goals of “social justice” and “self-determination.”
-
anna says:
“There is a very long road between the initial protests and who ends up in charge at the end of a revolution—any revolution.”
Yeah, look at the women leading the French revolution, and then look at the Napoleonic Code.
Sorry for the double post, by the way.
-
Carmonn says:
I think we all know how this will probably turn out. Women are always welcome as foot soldiers, but not as architects of a new society. Revolutionary, bourgeois, reactionary, there seems to be one fundamental point of agreement among all these mortal enemies.
-
lambert strether says:
-
Margaret Nelson says:
There were women on the streets when the protests were peaceful, but now that Mubarak’s thugs have been let loose, they and their children are in danger. The original protests were predominately secular, with the Muslim Brotherhood playing a minor role. Whatever happens, any new regime is unlikely to have much interest in being an ally of America, which has supported a brutal dictator for too long. As the protests have spread from Tunisia to Egypt, Yemen and (to a lesser extent) even Jordan, Israel must be feeling very nervous. The whole region will be unstable. There’s much more to worry about than the Islamists taking control.
