I rarely get overtly political on this blog. I have another one for that. But this is a gender issue and goes to the very heart of gender identity and what it means to be a human. What triggered my ire was this exchange between Veena Malik, a Pakistani film star and comedienne, and a Pakistani religious scholar on a Pakistani news program.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMnAmRa4NYw
Firstly, I want to make it clear that many Muslims do not adhere to the precept that women should cover themselves in public. Further more, Islam is not the only religion to have this precept. Orthodox Judaism also demands that women cover their hair, their arms, their legs. The reason for demanding women do so, in both religions, is to prevent men from being ‘overcome with desire’.
Although I don’t want to overlook the extensive debate on the status of women in either of these religious factions, I don’t want to focus on it here. Many people have written extensively on this topic. I want to focus on how demanding that women cover themselves can and does impact men’s understanding of their own agency and the level of responsibility their culture demands from them as individuals.
I cannot help but wonder why it has not occurred to people that by taking this attitude they absolve humans from being responsible for their own actions. Both these religions demand extremely high levels of personal responsibility – in honestly, in charity, etc. And yet in the case of sexual attraction, these religious precepts infantilize adult male adherents, or even worse.
By not placing responsibility for a man’s behaviour firmly on his shoulders, it reduces him to the level of an animal who has no control over his biological instincts. Basically, if he can’t control his lust, why is there any expectation that he can control his appetite, or his bowels?
And yet fasts, like Ramadan and Yom Kippur are specifically designed to establish the human ability to overcome their instincts.
Why then do these religions denigrate the authority, the agency and the humanity of their men? If men are evolved enough to intellectually choose to acknowledge the divine, and follow food laws and civil laws established under these auspices, why can they not be expected to be responsible for their sexual urges and the way they behave when they experience them?
I rarely condemn any culture or religion. But it is my honest opinion that any religion that does not trust its members enough to make them responsible for their own desires must view them as no better than dogs.
And that is deeply insulting and disempowering to all men. Power, in its more advanced form, is the ability to chose to act or not to act. It is to be responsible for oneself. Ultimately, it has been my experience that people act the way they are expected to act. If society feels you have no more control over yourself, sexually, than an animal, there is a fair chance that you won’t practice more control than that.
You know I’m in full agreement with you, particularly what forcing women to cover up says about men. Thank you for continuing to make that point, because I think it’s one of the few arguments that actually may influence folks.
I watched the Veena Malik interview and got very cross, particularly at the mealy-mouthed attitude of the cleric, calling her his sister then attacking her. The particular context to this is the disintegration of Pakistan and the fact that major public figures are particularly at risk if the challenge Islam. For example, a politician was killed after being criticised for suggesting the country’s blasphemy laws ought to be changed. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-12617562
So she is taking a personal risk by returning to Pakistan and the accusations against her could have dreadful consequences.
On the issue of covering up, it seems complicated to me by the enthusiastic adoption of the veil by Muslim women who feel they want to support their religion in the face of western Islamophobia. I’m as mystified by parents who dress their pre-teen daughters in Playboy t-shirts. Both seem to me to be part of the male-dominated narrative in both east and west, and so men aren’t off the hook, but women are actors here too.
Mehry, you make a very good point. I do understand that the more recent stampede of young Muslim women to cover their hair is utterly voluntary and is a statement of identity. Modes of dress have always been used as ways to make statements in the public sphere. And I believe that their perceptions of Islamophobia in the West are very real – especially since 9/11.
However, I wanted to specifically address the impact of the covering laws on males, and not just in Islam.
I didn’t really have the research capability or the wherewithal to discuss the fact that, if Pakistan is so utterly broken as a country, that it is depending on its every female citizen to represent its (current) values and national identity, then it is an admission that neither their values or identity are particularly robust. It is ridiculous to say that a country’s national identity is harmed by the behaviour any individual citizen. It speaks to a deep insecurity of identity and a paranoia. One could only hope that the clerics of Pakistan were as condemnatory when some of their male citizens traveled abroad and slaughtered civilians in Mumbai. However, I saw no such public cries of disapproval from the clerics. For this reason, I’m inclined to believe that this is sheer hypocrisy.
Not just hypocrisy on the part of that particular cleric but the worst sort of opportunism, designed to pander to misogynistic bigotry. Veena Malik makes the points very well, that there are many more important things he could be talking about – but they would require a little more bravery than attacking an actress for going on Indian TV.
Christianity does it as well — women are (were) expected to cover their heads in church, lest the beast in the man be diverted from the sermon.
Almost all religions, Buddhism included, ask that people going into their holy sites don’t wear revealing clothes. Although Buddhists don’t go for the head covering, you are asked to cover your shoulders, upper arms and legs.
I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that dress restrictions in a specific, religious place, are okay. I was perfectly happy to cover my head when I went into Mosques and Eastern Orthodox Churches in Istanbul, and was pretty disgusted with Western women standing in line who complained about being asked to do so.
People HAVE a choice about whether to go into a specific place or not. If you don’t want to cover up – if it offends you – then don’t go into mosques or churches or temples.
But to demand that someone cover up at all times in public is different. This stops being a matter of choice.
Precisely.
This a really well thought out and reasoned post rg.
“But it is my honest opinion that any religion that does not trust its members enough to make them responsible for their own desires must view them as no better than dogs.”
…or sheep…?
Precisely why I have no belief in God, and no respect for the hierarchs of religion who view us as nothing more than a way to legitimise their piss-poor career choice.
Being a die-hard atheist myself, I struggle to accept that the vast majority of people in the world need a sense that there is something more than them, superior to them, in the universe.
I guess, in my own way, and subtly, I’m suggesting that the ‘hierarchs’ as you call them, are so interested in possessing, maintaining and exercising their power, they will infantilize the male adherents of their faith to do it.
Sadly, it is of course all about control. That’s why the faithful weren’t allowed to have a Bible in their own language for so many centuries – translating it into English from the Latin was a truly radical act because it reduced the authority of the priests to have exclusive use of the hotline to God. Prescribing acceptable clothing, for whichever gender, falls into the same category, as far as I can see.
RG,
A strong passionate woman is a fearful thing to one that is perhaps insecure, fears for his position & status. I don’t have much knowledge about Muslim clerics, are they paid large amounts of money as the clergy in the so called Christian arenas?
As a father, I will object to certain choices the daughters makes for attire. I do see the Hollywood like western media does have a detrimental effect on the psyche… Pamela Anderson, really?
Authority should be wielded with love. Proper authority should build up, strengthen, instill confidence, & not tear down. Whether the authority is in the public or in the private home.
Thank you,
-TFP
When a child lives under your roof, you can *try* at least to exert that control. And you hope that the self-esteem and values you have passed onto your children will follow them into adulthood. However, when a middle-aged cleric tells a grown woman what to wear…nah, that’s out of line.
What’s more – and what my point is here, is that THIS is an emasculation of men. The undertext is that men don’t even have enough power to control their own urges. Women have to do it for them. It’s pathetic.
RG,
Make no mistake I agree with you on this matter, its not right for anyone to tell a grown woman what to wear or do.
As a father I drill into the sons that they are to be gentlemen when it comes to the opposite gender. Improper actions have consequences to shoulder. The “She was dressed like a slut” doesn’t absolve one from wrong actions. Self control is a strength a boy must be taught if he is to become a man with true strength.
-TFP
I’d also add that “she was dressed like a slut” says much more about the observer than the woman’s mode of dress. It implies a terrible lack of imagination.
True, true…
I’m very new here, but oh so glad to have found y’all. I had seriously never looked at this issue from the pov of what is implies about the males of a religion or culture with these restrictions on women. It does present men in a weaker light that the sight of a woman’s flesh will completely unhinge them and turn then into panting dogs that will hump anything. It should be as infuriating to them as it is to the women being oppressed in this way. But, with that in mind, it does allow men of lowly character an out to abuse women in their culture with that same ole tired “she was asking for it” excuse.
I am a Baptist and we have no clothing restriction in my particular branch of Christianity but there are others who do. Many Pentacostal sects not only require women to wear long skirts and sleeves and allow their hair to grow and not wear makeup, but they also require men to wear long sleeves and never wear shorts. It’s less an avoiding of tempting the opposite sex and more about showing respect to God by not flaunting your bodies and guarding your body as the temple of the Lord.
But, what this DOES do is create mystery. What is hidden is allows seen to be the thing that must be desired. I don’t think it inhibits desire at all, but the opposite. Humans are wired up with one thing that drives us onward and upward — curiosity. If we are told be can’t see something, we’ll move heaven and earth to see it. If we’re told we can’t touch, it’s all we think about. If it’s forbidden, it’s the Holy Grail. Putting a taboo on bodies just makes them more the focal point of a man or woman’s mind. Seeing a beautiful man buttoned up and suited up or in layers of clothing simply makes women imagine undressing him. It’s infinitely more desirable in my experience than that same man popping up in a Speedo (ew).
I’ve run on enough. Enjoying the conversation, though.
Suz, you’re cracking me up. You made your point with humor, and I find that’s the most convincing way to get a nay-sayer to think differently about something as serious as religion, male ego, obedience, mystery, godly dress codes …
A former landlord once shocked me with his opinion that women invite rape. He was unwavering in his opinion regardless of the obvious examples of uninvited assault I described that could not possibly be considered an invitation. His mind was focused on one image of females as temptresses regardless of age or circumstance. I was humorless in my attempt to widen his view. Unsuccessful at influencing him, I moved.
Human sexuality is probably the most studied, storied, and misunderstood subject ever. RG, thank you for inviting this blog. You’re a colorful treat for the grey matter.
xo