When I look at the television images of the protesters in Tahrir Square, and now in Tehran and in other countries, all I see is testosterone.
And this bothers me: it bothers me that there are few, if any, women in these protests, and it also bothers me (that is, makes me embarrassed) that I am bringing such a Western-feminist perspective to those images. After all, according to an NBC news report this evening, the major organizer for the Egyptian protests was a woman. She coordinated the online and texting campaign, albeit inside, not outside.
I know that women in societies throughout the Middle East and South Asia, and no doubt other parts of the world, are the family members who stay home. It's cultural, perhaps religious, often socio-economic, and happens in the US in some communities as well. I also know that many of these same women are highly educated and bring their own contributions to the cause: if they weren't at home taking care of the children, preparing meals, sending their kids to school, their husbands couldn't be on the streets protesting. Maybe there’s a whole network of women texting and calling, to get their men to the right places. I suspect there is some complexity behind the scenes that I can’t see.
But at a gut level I am bothered by those images. Maybe they remind me of the discomfort I felt during the three years I was in India, the annoyance, the vague sense not so much of fear but of foreignness, of difference, of being (figuratively) overpowered by crowds of men everywhere. Men wearing white or light-green shirts and dark pants, all looking roughly the same age, would race their motorbikes or bicycles in a swarm through any intersection in Pune as the light went from red to green. I felt trapped, in a completely irrational way (these men weren't after me at all) by those hordes of men, often young men, whether they were on motorbikes or walking down the streets or staring at me as if they'd never seen a woman before. Often, I was numbed by the thought of how many thousands of miles I would have to travel in order not to experience crowds of staring men everywhere.
And they often seemed not to be " doing" anything. This, of course, is a Western or even American perspective: that we always have to be doing something; that it's not okay to hang around outside for hours, or visit the shop your friend owns and talk to him all afternoon while he’s working. What I wondered and still wonder as I watch these protests is: how do these thousands of men have time to spend two or three or ten or eighteen days, or however long it takes, in the streets protesting? And who are they? Are they all unemployed? If they work, will they have a job to return to? And if there are mainly men in the streets, is the revolution only about men’s problems?
It’s entirely possible that I haven’t watched the right news sources to answer these questions, but I have not heard answers. On the one hand, I’m amazed, happy, dumbfounded at the success of Egypt’s revolution: can we Americans imagine that happening in the States? On the Mall in Washington, mass protests even at their most earnest never last more than a day (not in my memory, anyway). Who would stay in the streets for eighteen days in this country?
On the other hand, I find the gender element of the Egypt story, and all the Middle-East revolution stories, missing.
What do you think?
I agree with you Amy partly. While it's true that media doesn't always portray things the way they are or they always seem to have an angle, I don't think that women have not participated as much as you think they did. In fact, my understanding from various sources is that at least 20-40 percent of protesters were women, although they might have not all protested on the streets! There are so many facebook groups and websites that have tried to bring the contributions of women to the forefront.
ReplyDeleteLink: https://www.facebook.com/album.php?fbid=493689677675&id=586357675&aid=268523
One thing that does irk me is how people growing up with the ideologies present in the west have this almost uncontrollable nature to make things right when they see things different to what they are used to (perhaps impatient). What is even more annoying is the rest of the world following suit. Who said taking care of children and staying home is bad? Its all to do with what works best, the ability to make a choice, and having the support that each of us deserve. I know so many men who would love to take some time off work and be a home maker! but the society looks at those men as if something is wrong with them! (I'm not saying I don't believe in women's rights- but that bashing men might not be the answer).
How long you spend protesting depends a lot on what's at stake, trust/distrust in the government among many other things.
Change happens slowly- one cannot expect the whole of Middle East and South Asia to get educated over night, and change within a year! The way I see it, a lot of things have changed! however slow it might be...we need to appreciate the complexity of the situation (like you had mentioned: cultural, religious and socio-economic etc).
On a final note, none of my comments are an attack on your post, rather, mere opinions. I really appreciate the thought you have put into this matter, and how you have questioned your own beliefs. Thanks for the post!
Thanks for your post, Anonymous 11:57. I appreciate the link. These are wonderful photos, exactly what I was looking for!
ReplyDeletePlease understand that I don't intend to say that the U.S. should in any way impose the same kind of society on other countries. In fact, I think there's a lot we can learn from the commitment of the Egyptian and Tunisian people in getting rid of corrupt and autocratic leaders.
Interesting comment about how long people spend protesting. That's the element that has really fascinated me.
I hope you'll feel free to use your name, or a name, in the future, Anonymous, and that you will keep posting.
t seems like you are raising two issues: 1) why has the media portrayal of the revolution there being so dominated by images of men, when women have participated in different ways, and 2) a self-reflection about gender norms that you're used to and in places that make you somewhat uncomfortable.
ReplyDeleteOn the first, I think it's a great point. I haven't followed any of the coverage very closely -- I don't have TV, so have mostly seen stuff in print and on the Daily Show. I have seen *some* images of women, but you're certainly right that it has been mostly men.
Why couldn't the media have gone into some homes and seen how women were working behind the scenes, whether by taking care of the kids of a group of families, or by facebooking, or whatever? They could, and probably should have. It makes a slightly less charismatic story than masses of people in the square yelling. It's a very different media narrative, more akin to one NPR or an even more alternative media source would tell, because it wouldn't sell as much -- it doesn't fit our expectations as consumers of the news, and the news media are so risk averse...they play it safe, and show what everyone is showing, what we want to see, not what might be an important story.
To your second point, I read it less as a critique of Egypt and India, and more as a self-reflection on your own discomfort. I think most people feel that when faced with cultures different than their own, and in my mind, as long as one is reflective rather than imposing, then that discomfort is wonderful. Whether there is some universal baseline for gender norms -- that's another question.
We read a chapter of a really great book on women in Islam a few years back in grad school. I don't remember much about it, other than "it was good", and pushed back on western notions of feminism. It was Saba Mahmood's _Politics of Piety: The Islamic Revival and the Feminist Subject_
Good comments Anon 11:57 -- I'd only push back on your suggestion that "change takes time," which to me implies that there is linear progress/change, and that "with time" the rest will look like the west. I'm not sure that was your intent, but to me that's the implications of your language.