Women and fundamentalism
Are women attracted to fundamentalist movements? Why?
Women, like men, take different political positions. They are present in conservative and progressive movements. It would be naive, even dangerous, to claim that women are progressive or peaceable ‘by nature,’ because both sexes are culturally and socially constructed and conditioned.
Consequently, I start from the ideas that:
Women are not only critics of fundamentalist policies – they are also active supporters and participants in fundamentalist movements;
Women are not only innocent victims of patriarchal policies—retrograde, reactionary movements, including fascist ones—but also actively participate in these movements;
Women participate in movements directed against women’s autonomy and freedom and against basic women’s rights. Patriarchy maintains its power through mechanisms of control and through the creation of particular notions of women, women’s beauty, and sexuality. Most importantly, this is maintained through the triad of sexism, nationalism, and militarism. The question is the degree to which women succeed in dismantling the aforementioned patriarchal control and making these mechanisms weaker;
All fundamentalist movements subject women to various forms of abuse – segregation, gender apartheid, and humiliation;
Women of various ethnicities and differing educational levels participate in fundamentalist movements.
Despite all of this, fundamentalist movements succeed in mobilizing women; women are involved not only as “background.” They do not act only in the private sphere, the sphere of family and community, but they are often on the front line of fundamentalist activities, including armed activities. Many feminist theorists and activists are engaged with this issue. They do not intend to give definitive answers, but to address the complexity of the problem.
Here are some of the explanations for the strengthening fundamentalist movements and for women’s (and others’) participation in fundamentalist movements:
Unfulfilled Expectations in Communist and Capitalist Systems
Let us first explore the outcomes of the fall of the systems in Eastern Europe based upon Communist Party monopolies:
This system’s failure—economically politically, morally and intellectually—has resulted in a rehabilitation of religious belief, belief that that system wanted to throw to the garbage heap of history. From Poland to Afghanistan, religion was a meeting point for everyone who was “fighting against communism” (Amin Maloof);
Secular states in Eastern Europe were not democratic. Despite the separation of church and state, religious freedoms and rights did not exist de facto. This shows that secular character of the state is condition for democracy, but not its guarantor. “How can one explain that the most religious and nationalist people emerged from the so-called proletariat and internationalist world of Eastern Europe?” asks Amin Maloof before concluding that “a secular state without democracy is a terrible misfortune for both democracy and secularism;”
In countries where civic values and civic identity had not taken root (Eastern European countries and the former Yugoslavia), mobilization on ethnic and religious base happened (Zagorka Golubovic);
In the first multi-party elections in every former Yugoslav state, most women voted for nationalist parties, illustrating an undeveloped civil society, lack of an autonomous women’s movement, and the intact patriarchal structures (Stasa Zajovic).
Neo-Liberal Economic Globalization Strengthens Fundamentalist Movements:
The western model of development is in crisis. It cannot solve the problems of poverty, unemployment, and delinquency in its own countries, especially in large cities (Amin Maloof);
Neo-liberal economic globalization processes mostly affect the poor, especially poor women. When the social welfare state is weakened due to pressure from a merciless market economy, women face a loss of basic security. Social support networks disappear and are not replaced with any new system of social support. This vacuum is filled by fundamentalist movements that organize so-called alternative social service institutions when states are no longer able to provide for their citizens. Of course, all of the support is gender-based; for example, the clothes offered are in keeping with religious rules. This is especially true among services for Muslim women (Nira Yuval-Davis and Marie-Aimee and Anissa Helie-Lucas);
An Islamist party in Turkey (The Welfare Party) offered women a friendly community, a place of belonging, but on the condition that they accept Islam as a way of life” (Ipek Ilkkaracan).
Religious and Ethnic Identity as a False Source of Security:
Both capitalism and communism proved to be incapable of meeting material, emotional and spiritual needs. General feelings of despair and disorientation have made people susceptible to religion as a source of redemption. In times when people are not sure whether they will have place to live, a job, or even a family, religion gives them a feeling of stability and meaning. In such times, primordial identities constructed around ethnicity, religion, and race become extremely important (Nira Yuval-Davis);
Fundamentalism reduces women to “helpless beings,” the “the weaker sex” that needs protection. Unfortunately, women often fall into this trap of false protection, which, in reality, is oppression. In situations of general insecurity, some fundamentalist ideas become “attractive by freeing women from responsibility and autonomy and by giving them false security” (Frances Kissling)
Illusions that Theocratic Systems (in which the State is Organized according to Religious Rules) would Bring More Rights for Women:
Under the previous secular system “women felt alienated. Many of them came to believe that the new theocratic authorities in Iran would institute more rights. This was a huge deception” (Azar Nafisi);
Women’s Illusions that Nationalist Fundamentalist Movements are Progressive Peoples’ Movements:
This relates to women who belong to ethnic, racial, or religious minorities.
“We remind those who say that fundamentalism is a peoples’ movement that Hitler was also democratically elected, but he did not benefit democracy” (Marie-Aimee Helie-Lucas). It is not necessary to go so far back in the past to find such an example. Remembering that Slobodan Milosevic won several democratic elections is enough;
We forgive the excesses of those who suffered because of colonial arrogance, racism, and xenophobia and their nationalist arrogance, racism, and xenophobia. Because of this, we are becoming indifferent to the fate of their victims, at least so long as blood does not flow in torrents. (Amin Maloof, Lebanon/France);
In 1999, after more than a decade of ethnic cleansing and apartheid imposed on the Albanian population by the Serbian regime, ethnic cleansing against non-Albanians was committed in the name of the Albanian community in Kosovo.
Illusions of Women’s “Empowerment” through Re-Traditionalization, Especially through Gender Segregation:
In the fundamentalist communities where women and men are divided, women spend a lot of time together. There are a lot of emotional relationships among women. Some theorists (namely Debra Kaufman) emphasize the similarity between the feelings of empowerment among Jewish female fundamentalists and among radical feminists. In this case, however, autonomy as radical feminists’ choice is confused with the male-defined role and sphere imposed on women in fundamentalist communities (Nira Yuval-Davis, Israel/United Kingdom).
Women from Ultra-Nationalist—Clero-Fascist—Movements Punish and Physically Attack “Traitors” to the Nation, Human Rights Defenders, and Feminists:
“During 2004, women were used more often than during the Milo_evi_ regime to attack Women in Black. Political ‘pimps’ took women to the streets to attack political opponents.” (Stasa Zajovic).
The Myth of Young Women’s Empowerment through Religious Mobilization – through Control over Other Women and All Who are Different:
Some Islamist movements (those in Algeria are a good example) offer young girls the role of transmitters of Islamist propaganda. “That makes possible for them to enter the public sphere, to move not only inside the mosques, but also in the streets and universities. Through these actions, they supposedly break patriarchal codes about women’s movement. However, these young women discipline other women, especially those who do not follow the dress code. They participate in oppressive systems that eliminate ‘others’ and difference.” (Sherifa Bouata, Algeria)
Women Participate in Fundamentalist Movements Because of Systematic Terror and Oppression:
“Fundamentalist practices are imposed by terror. Since Khomeini came to power in Iran, there has been systematic terror and imposition. Women had to choose between prison and wearing a veil. When they were disobedient, women were subject to whipping or even death. Authorities announced the requirement to wear a veil. Women students and professors who refused were taken to court.” (Azar Nafisi, Iran/USA).
Fundamentalisms and the Misuse of the Right to Choice and Right to Diversity
A right to choice, to differ, and to be different is one of the most important achievements of the modern world. It is a fundamental human right. However, fundamental rights are subject to manipulation from the very different standpoints, including rightwing, ultra-rightwing, liberal, leftist, and feminist.
The Concept of Difference: What is Difference?
for rightwing movements—nationalist, racist, fascist, and fundamentalist movements—diversity is based upon natural differences. Natural differences (including sex, ethnicity, and race) are “eternal and unchangeable.” Patriarchy is based upon the “naturalness” of these differences; “naturalness” justifies social inequality and different social roles, which lead to one sex, ethnicity, and race holding economic and all other powers over others. “Fascist forces support the right to difference, because—for them—that right legitimizes racial inferiority” (Marie-Aimee Helie-Lucas);
for progressive, leftist forces—civic-minded political parties, human rights defenders, and feminist activists—all natural differences have the same social value. They must not be the reason for economic inequality or any other form of inferiority. That means respecting only those differences which support universal human rights, women’s human rights, and civil rights.
“Specific Cultural Identities” or a Universal Patriarchal Culture of Oppressing Women?
In the name of respecting “cultural identity,” “cultural characteristics,” or the “right to choice,” extremely oppressive practices are justified. Each one of us does this. We will later see the reasons for these acts. Now, we will mention only a few examples which refute that oppression is because of “specific and particular” identities and cultures. It is because of the universal culture – patriarchal violence against women. Of course, there are specific ways of victimizing women, but patriarchal oppression is a universal culture. We will demonstrate this through the following examples.
1. Covering Women: although this is mostly related to Islamism, all three monotheist religions (Christianity, Judaism, and Islam) prescribe this obligation to women:
Orthodoxy - “covering the head is a symbol of women’s obedience to her husband and the church. It is the mark of men’s authority over women, the principle of highness and honor” (Patriarch Pavle of the Serbian Orthodox Church);
Judaism - “married (but not unmarried) women in Jewish fundamentalist communities are required to cover their heads, supposedly because of modesty. The styles of covering vary from shaving the head to wearing a wig or a veil” (Nira Yuval-Davis);
Islam - “women’s hair (as well as women’s voices) is considered to be provocative and should be hidden and forbidden” (Azar Nafisi, Iran).
2. Violence against Women: Emphasizing “Cultural Differences” or “Specific Cultural Identities” Serves as a Universal Justification and Legitimization of Violence against Women:
Christianity requires women, regardless of their husbands’ bad traits, to be obedient and to make concessions to him to establish peace in marital relationships and reestablish marital happiness” (The opinion of the Serbian Orthodox Church, see Patriarch Pavle’s Let Some Issues of Our Belief be Comprehensible to Us, Belgrade, 1998);
In Iran and Saudi Arabia, women cannot leave the country without the written permission of their fathers or husbands;
It is an orthodox Hinduism custom to burn widows after their husband’s death.
3. Repression of Reproductive and Sexual Rights is a Universal Practice of Control over Women:
“All Serbian Orthodox church priests, under the leadership of patriarch Pavle, constantly call upon doctors to stop performing abortions, while they continue to support war, war crimes, racism, xenophobia, homophobia, and fascism.” (Boban Stojanovic);
Every year, 6,000 girls (mostly in Muslim countries) are subjugated to female genital mutilation. Many of them die from this procedure.” (World Health Organization);
“The Vatican’s crusade is a permanent offensive, not only against abortion, but against divorce, all forms of contraception, and gay marriage. In Latin America, 6 million illegal abortions are performed every year. This is the main cause of death of women of reproductive age in the region” (Marta Alanis);
In the USA alone, it is estimated that several thousand of women, mostly racial minorities and poor women, die every year from the consequences of illegal abortions.
United Fundamentalists Use All Modern Technologies; They Act Globally against Women.
Despite the extent to which they hate and despise each other, fundamentalists create alliances and coalitions worldwide. Islamic, Jewish, and Hindu fundamentalists act together against democracy and human rights, especially women’s human rights.
There are thousands of examples, though I will mention only few:
Patriarch Pavle claims that he is engaged only in spiritual things, that he never watches TV or listens to radio, but he never misses a chance to “advise” his parishioners before elections to vote for clero-nationalist and clero-fascist parties;
Khomeini rejected women’s right to vote as “western depravity,” but decided to recognize it when he came to power. The Islamic state in Iran uses the parts of western democracy that suit them, including parliament and elections. They even support contraception in order to decrease high population growth;
Nationalists and fundamentalists hate most the so-called traitors within their own ethnic group. An example of this is in the speech given by the former dean of the Law Faculty of the University of Belgrade, Oliver Antic, at the public meeting of Serbian Radical Party in early spring 2006. He said that the wife and daughter of the Belgrade mufti are closer to him than women human rights defenders with a Serbian name. It is well known that the Serbian radical Party is Islamophobic.
“Intolerance against atheists (in modern Serbia) is greater than intolerance against persons who follow other religions. Human rights defenders join atheists in the same demonized group.” (Olga Popovic-Obradovic);
The Global Gag Rule was the first law to be signed by George W. Bush, on the first day of his presidency (in January 2001). The law prohibits USAID from giving resources for family planning, especially for health services that provide abortion or NGOs in developing countries that work to de-criminalization or de-penalization abortion. Through this law, the American administration directly obstructs democratic development in the countries to which it gives aid, supports fundamentalist movements, and jeopardizes basic women’s rights.
Tolerance in the Function of Justifying Violence
It is important to mention that tolerance towards the cultural practice of covering women can be seen in the popular media. This practice is perceived as something exotic and romantic, even in extremely Islamophobic countries, such as Serbia and Croatia. Two famous TV show presenters (Hloverka Novak Srzic and Olivera Kovacevic) publicly put on the veil during their shows in order to demonstrate that they are democratic and tolerant. Why do they not show the same understanding for feminists in their countries who are fighting against the increased clericalization of society?
Popular right-wing media are not the only ones who are benevolent towards various forms of patriarchal oppression; many alternative media have been caught in the same trap of cultural relativism. “For today’s western culture, it is hard to accept the fact that some other culture does not want to show the faces of their women or their prophets” (Zarez, April 6, 2006, Zagreb).
What are the Consequences of this Kind of Tolerance?
As feminists, we know that women, especially women’s human rights activists, are the best source of information about their own lives and the forms of violence they suffer. It is our obligation to listen to them first, instead of following stereotypes or falling into ideological traps. Do we always do this?
“The right to self-determination of the nation-state must not jeopardize any previously-gained rights. Traditional law, which mostly affects women, must not be rehabilitated in the name of preserving “cultural identity,” irrespective of whether it is major community or minority community in question.” (Women in Black, from The Women’s Peace Platform for the Kosovo Final Status Negotiations).
Respect for customs and advocating so-called cultural freedoms leads to a situation where nobody in democratic countries reacts to sexual crimes and other crimes against women and children. The absence of reaction, the presence of “‘tolerance’ has led to a state in which violence related to cultural identity is increasing among ethnic minority communities. All cultural and moral relativists who promote theses about human rights as a Western invention and say that expectations must be modified to fit ‘Asian’, ‘African’ or even ‘Islamic’ approaches to human rights, are responsible for this situation.” (Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Somalia/The Netherlands)
Cultural relativists ignore the demands of non-Muslim Iranian women. For them, the century-long Iranian women’s movement is not a part of Iranian culture. Feminists should respect every woman’s freedom to wear or not wear a veil (a decision imposed in Iran by state terror) without romanticizing the veil as a tool for women’s liberation. The reduction of a person’s identity to only one aspect – Muslim – is fundamentalists’ construction. Consequently, we must avoid that trap” (Sharzad Mojab).
Human rights violations in the name of religious or ethnic tradition are in opposition to the spirit of universality. “There are values that relate to all human beings. Traditions deserve to be respected only to the degree that they respect the basic human rights of women and men. To show respect for discriminatory traditions or laws is to despise the victims.” (Amin Maloof)
More on the Traps of Cultural and Moral Relativism: Why do We Get Sucked into Them?
Why do we act in this way? Why does every one of us get sucked into the trap of cultural or even moral relativism? Why do we justify trends when minority community is in question, while determinedly oppose them in places where we live?
If we come from aggressor states or collaborator states or dominant communities (for example, Serbia in relation to its surroundings, or Western countries in relation to the so-called Third World), we fear that any critique of a minority community will be perceived as collaboration with the perpetrators of injustice and discrimination and as a lack of empathy and understanding for the problems of the minor community;
If we come from the aforementioned states or communities, we feel shame or even guilt for aggressions, crimes, policies, and injustices carried out by our regimes. In vain, we repeat that the guilt is very patriarchal. We should overcome it as feminists. My experience has shown me that this kind of guilt is best overcome if women, and especially feminists, are held to the principles of feminist ethics.
A large part of today’s left-wing is driven by the idea that “an enemy of my enemy is my friend.” It consciously does not differentiate between the right to difference as a real choice from cultural identity as something imposed and forced. We experienced that in the case of Milo_evi_ who was supported by a large number of Western “anti-imperialists” as an “anti-imperialist fighter.” That (mostly dogmatic) part of the left-wing never wanted to hear the views of those of us who lived here and opposed Milo_evi_’s imperialist policy. Fundamentalist movements know these traps and weaknesses. Consciously or unconsciously, this part of left-wing harms progressive movements in the west and in the Third World.
Feminist Ethics – an Alternative to Fundamentalisms
There are many feminist responses which are an integral part of democratic alternatives to fundamentalisms. I will mention only two:
The secular state. The separation of the church and the state;
The secular society. The non-involvement of churches and religious institutions in the educational sphere and human rights issues, especially women’s human rights.
In the last 20 years, numerous feminist networks have been created globally. Simultaneously, fundamentalist movements have formed stronger relationships, strategic alliances, and coalitions against democracy, human rights, and civil rights.
In order to empower feminist solidarity networks against fundamentalisms, it is important to mention some of the ethical principles which Women in Black has fostered since the beginning of their work in 1991.
Let us not be fooled by our own. Fundamentalism must first be addressed where one lives. Then, after you have denounced violence and crimes committed in your name (in the name of your nation, religion, and tradition), you gain the moral autonomy and political legitimacy to denounce crimes committed elsewhere. In Serbia, for example, feminist ethics demands that we first condemn ethnic cleansing and all other crimes and forms of nationalist/fundamentalist violence committed by the Serbian side. Only after that can we condemn the similar phenomena in other places.
Use anger and bitterness to organize together with other women. Feminism is the thought and practice of rebellion. Feminism is not only testimony of violence against women, but also the practice of women’s active nonviolent resistance and solidarity.
Accept the role of traitor, deserter, and breaker of all forms of national consensus. Feminist movement can become stronger only if feminists reject all forms of national, ethnic, and religious homogenization.
Feminist solidarity is understanding other women and building consensus among feminists that every form of nationalism and fundamentalism means exclusion and annihilation of other women. Consequently, feminist solidarity is not only solidarity among women and across all state and religious boundaries and divisions, but respect for the different circumstances in which women live, as well as respect for different strategies and forms of struggle against fundamentalism.
Feminist solidarity excludes victimization and paternalism. We should not search for “advancements” in one kind of oppression against women in relation to another, of one form of patriarchy over the other, but to constantly have feminist consensus in mind. Patriarchy is universal and actions against patriarchy should be universal. Instead of emphasizing our differences or what separates us, it is much better and more important to emphasize what connects and unites us.
Feminist internationalism launches common global actions. Fundamentalisms are a global phenomenon; women’s responses should be global and based upon feminist solidarity.
Belgrade, April 28, 2006.
RSS 2.0