|
Video
& Audio Cassettes Vcd's
and Dvd's

|
| |
The
Choice Between Burqa and Bikini
Abid
Ullah Jan
Now
that "repressive" Taliban are gone and their "draconian
rule" has come to an end, the question that comes to mind after looking at
one of the recent Time Magazine's (1) pictures of the week is: why are almost 99
per cent Afghan women still clad in Burqa? What forces them to remain in what
New York Times' Nicholas D. Kristof calls "tents"? (2)
Some of the Muslims believes it is "the traditional or custom based wearing
of Burqa" which is now practiced "by choice as before." They
further elaborate their idea: "By choice wearing of Burqa has 2 components
to it: 1) It is enforced by the male head of household 2) It is enforced by the
fear of potential castigation, or ridicule for not wearing by society."
Again the questions is: If all these cultural and traditional forces were in
place and 99 per cent women preferred to wear Burqa by choice, why did the
Taliban chose to enforce something that was already practiced and why was there
so much hue and cry about it?
Burqa was just one aspect of the broader campaign against Islamic values under
the cover of targeting Taliban atrocities. Status of women in Afghanistan today
shows how biased and how hypocritical that campaign has been all along. Everyone
knows that Taliban were not calling the shots in Afghanistan during 2002.
American government and its Allies certainly were. The facts regarding women
status in Afghanistan during 2002 as published in Human Rights Watch latest
report (December 17) proves hypocrisy and biased approach of the western media
toward covering events in Muslim world.
According to the 57-page report, increasingly harsh restrictions on women and
girls have been imposed by local governors, who receive military and financial
aid from the US government. The Human Rights Watch says that the situation in
Herat is symptomatic of the developments across the country and women and girls
are facing new restrictions in several other regions as well.
Co-author of the report Zama Coursen-Neff observed: "Many people out side
the country believe the Afghan women have had their rights restored. It's just
not true. The women and girls are still being abused, harassed and threatened
all over Afghanistan, often by the government troops and officials."
Let's not forget that the same situation prevailed before the Taliban. There
was, nevertheless, no one to point out the facts with half as much enthusiasm as
they displayed in cooking up myths about repression of women by "religious
zealots of the Taliban movement" simply because their stated objective was
the establishment of an Islamic state.
RAWA, NOW, Amnesty, Physicians for Human Rights and others are nowhere in the
picture to cover mounting women rights abuses under the nose of US and its
Allies. Boston Globe is no more calling Afghanistan "a death camp for
women," in its editorials. (3) No one asks how school boys are being
recruited to spy on women and report on their activities to the present
government in Afghanistan. No one talks about the continued restrictions on
women right to work in the US-controlled Afghanistan. A few publicity stunts of
women freedom in Kabul doesn't reflect prevailing situation outside a few
sections of Kabul city.
It is not that the forces which unleashed malicious propaganda against the
Taliban would remain shut for far too long. According to Human Rights Watch
report, in many areas "the local police and troops are enforcing the
Taliban-era restrictions." What does it mean? It means the US war for
liberalising and liberating the Muslim world has just initiated and the
conclusions are being drawn that it is not the Taliban who are repressive, but
anyone who follows fundamentals of Islam becomes callous to human rights.
Charges of Human or women rights abuses by Muslims would never end with the end
of so-labelled theocratic regimes in Muslim world.
In fact, covered in a Burqa or uncovered in a bikini - is a subtle subtext in
the "war against terrorism." The United States did not engage in this
war to avenge women's rights in Afghanistan. The US war against the Taliban
highlights the US objective to fully impose its cultural ways in which, for
example, its own cultural ''uncovering'' of the female body impacts the lives of
the whole nation.
It is not the Taliban rule, but the teachings of Islam that dictates that women
be fully covered whenever they enter the public realm. And that is one of the
many Qur'anic injunctions on which the US has declared its "war on
terrorism." Once embraced Islam, one has no choices to make other than
obeying what is prescribed in the Holy Qur'an. Islam dictates that women be
fully covered in public realm, while a recent US television commercial for
''Temptation Island 2'' features near naked women.
Although the US seem to have won the war against the Taliban, it is important
for it to gain a better understanding of the Muslim's rejection of American
culture. Women's behaviour in Western society is all but a single locus of this
rejection.
The irony is that the images of sleek, bare women in Western popular media that
offend Muslims also represent a major offensive against the health of Western
women and girls. During the 20th century, American culture in particular has
dictated a nearly complete uncovering of the female form. In Victorian America,
good works were a measure of female character, while today good looks reign
supreme. From the hair removal products that hit the marketplace in the 1920s to
today's diet control measures that seek to eliminate even healthy fat from the
female form, American girls and women have been stripped bare by a sexually
expressive culture whose beauty dictates have exerted a major toll on their
physical and emotional health.
The unrealistic body images that the Americans see and admire every day in the
media are literally eating away at the female backbone of their nation. A
cursory look at women's magazines, popular movies and television programs reveal
a wide range of images modelling behaviours that directly assault the human
skeleton. Irrespective of the social and moral impact of women exercising free
choice, the ultra-thin, uncovered women pictured in a magazine sipping a martini
or smoking a cigarette are prime candidates for osteoporosis later in life.
In fact, many behaviours made attractive by the popular media, including eating
disorders, teen smoking, drinking, and the depression and anxiety disorders that
can occur when one does not measure up are taking a major toll on female health
and well-being. In 2000, the American Medical Association acknowledged a link
between violent images on the screen and violent behaviour among children. In a
world where 8-year-olds are on diets, adult women spend $300 million a year to
slice and laser their bodies and legal pornography is a $56 billion industry, it
is time to note the dangers of uncovered and unhealthy body images for girls and
women.
Now that Muslims' "horrific treatment of women" is common knowledge,
dieting and working out to wear a string bikini has become a patriotic act. The
"war on terrorism" has certainly raised the western awareness of the
ways in which women's bodies are controlled by a "repressive Islamic
regime" in a far away land, but what about the constraints on women bodies
in the West?
Although these problems may seem small in the face of the threat of Al-Qaeda
attack and Saddam Hussein's bio-terrorism, there is still a need to better
understand how American culture developed to the point that it now threatens the
health of its bikini-clad daughters and their mothers. There is also a need to
understand why Muslims abhor the US ways to imposing its cultural values through
cruise missiles, occupations and media onslaught.
Covered or uncovered? Even if we take religion out of the debate; if the
homefront choice is not about morality, still we may see that following western
values puts the physical and emotional health of future generations at stake all
over the world.
According to Kristof: "I kept asking [Saudi] women how they felt about
being repressed, and they kept answering indignantly that they aren't
repressed." However, he believes that it is not paternalistic of the West
to try to liberate women who insist that they're happy as they are? It might be
hard for the cultural imperialists of the West to digest, but the undeniable
reality is that Islam doesn't offer choices when it boils down to the right to
wear Burqa or bikini.
It is not the eyes of a woman in purdah but the anxious darkly circled eyes of a
girl with anorexia nervosa -- the woman trapped inside -- that needs to be
liberated from the invisible cultural confines of the west. The Burqa and the
bikini represent opposite ends of spectrum. We need to find out which one
actually exert a noose-like grip on the psyche, social and physical health of
girls and women before jeering at others or internationalising our values.
References:
1:http://www.time.com/time/potw/20021220/6.html
2:Nicholas D. Kristof, "Saudis in Bikinis," New York Times, October
25, 2002.
3:"Afghanistan war against women," Boston Globe, Editorial, March 25,
1999, page-A-22.
| |
|