The Caged Virgin: An Emancipation Proclamation for Women and Islam (2 page)

I understand that a Muslim may feel a duty to scold anyone who attempts to call into question the absoluteness of God’s word or someone who regards other sources of morality as equal, or superior even, to the Prophet Muhammad’s. History shows that for many people to make a mental transition of this magnitude and question their beliefs is always a very slow process, and one that generates resistance and causes bloodshed. In this context I can place the murder of Theo van Gogh, the death threats and legal steps against me, and the intense rejection and condemnation of me as an individual, a heretic, and a blasphemer. Remember that the Protestant Reformation took many years of protest (the source of its name) as well as bloodshed and widespread unrest to establish itself firmly. A quick look at Islamic history shows us that critical voices from within Islam have almost all been either killed or exiled. I find myself in good company: Salman Rushdie, Irshad Manji, Taslima Nasreen, Muhammad Abu Zaid—they all have been threatened by fellow believers and are now being guarded by non-Muslims.

Nonetheless we who were brought up with Islam must summon the courage to break through this wall of emotional resistance or to climb over it, until eventually the number of critics grows large enough to counterbalance the entrenched opposition effectively. In order to achieve this we will need the help of the liberal West, whose interests are greatly served by a reform of Islam. But above all, we Muslims must help each other.

I am feeling optimistic about that reform. I base my optimism on positive signs, like the local elections in Saudi Arabia (although women were excluded from these elections, at least the elections were held); the successful elections in Iraq and Afghanistan (where a secular government has taken over after the Taliban); the demonstrations against the terror of the Islamic Party by journalists and academics in Morocco; and the promising agreements between Sharon and Abbas about the future of Israel and Palestine. Abbas is more reasonable than the late Arafat and seems to act in the interest of the Palestinians, and Israel’s giving back the land to the Palestinians for self-rule is good progress, although the election in which Hamas became the ruling party is a setback. Another indication of progress is Pakistan’s acceptance of Israeli aid to the victims of the terrible October 8, 2005, earthquake. Of course, I realize that these are quite recent developments.

I am optimistic, and I normally would have looked to the West for help in reforming Islam, from secular liberals, Westerners who are traditionally opposed to the enforcement of religious beliefs and customs. In certain countries, “left-wing,” secular liberals have stimulated my critical thinking and that of other Muslims. But these same liberals in Western politics have the strange habit of blaming themselves for the ills of the world, while seeing the rest of the world as victims. To them, victims are to be pitied, and they lump together all pitiable and suppressed people, such as Muslims, and consider them good people who should be cherished and supported so that they can overcome their disadvantages. The adherents to the gospel of multiculturalism refuse to criticize people whom they see as victims. Some Western critics disapprove of United States policies and attitudes but do not criticize the Islamic world, just as, in the first part of the twentieth century, Western socialist apologists did not dare criticize the Soviet labor camps. Along the same lines, some Western intellectuals criticize Israel, but they will not criticize Palestine because Israel belongs to the West, which they consider fair game, but they feel sorry for the Palestinians, and for the Islamic world in general, which is not as powerful as the West. They are critical of the native white majority in Western countries but not of Islamic minorities. Criticism of the Islamic world, of Palestinians, and of Islamic minorities is regarded as Islamophobia and xenophobia.

I cannot emphasize enough how wrongheaded this is. Withholding criticism and ignoring differences are racism in its purest form. Yet these cultural experts fail to notice that, throught their anxious avoidance of criticizing non-Western countries, they trap the people who represent these cultures in a state of backwardness. The experts may have the best of intentions, but as we all know, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

My own criticism of Islamic religion and culture is felt by some to be “harsh,” “offensive,” and “hurtful.” But the attitude of the cultural experts is, in fact, harsher, and more offensive and hurtful. They feel superior and do not regard Muslims as equal discussion partners, but as the “others” who should be shielded. And they think that criticism of Islam should be avoided because they are afraid that Muslims can only respond to criticism with anger and violence. These cultural experts are badly letting down us Muslims who have obeyed the call to show our sense of public responsibility and are speaking out.

I have taken an enormous risk by answering the call for self-reflection and by joining in the public debate that has been taking place in the West since 9/11. And what do the cultural experts say? “You should have said it in a different way.” But since Theo van Gogh’s death, I have been convinced more than ever that I must say it in
my
way only and have
my
criticism.

I
was born in Somalia in 1969 and raised in an Islamic family. My father, Hirsi Magan, is a well-known opposition leader who challenged the dictatorship of Mohamed Siad Barre. Probably in 1975 or 1976, he was forced to flee Somalia, and our family followed him. Via Saudi Arabia and Ethiopia, we reached Kenya.

At age twenty-two, as a Muslim young woman, I was given in marriage to a distant cousin, a nephew of my father’s. Had we been married, I would have lived out my days in isolation as a housewife and mother. But I refused to attend the wedding ceremony, which was to be held in Canada, and shortly afterward I escaped to the Netherlands. There, I applied for and was granted asylum, learned Dutch, worked as an interpreter in a number of places—including abortion clinics and women’s refuge centers—and took a degree in political science.

That was ten years ago. In the Netherlands, I am able to study and work. I can also voice my opinion here. Through newspapers, magazines, television, and radio, I have criticized Islam and the Islamic community. My comments stir up strong feelings. The attention I strove to give to the plight of Muslim women in the Netherlands and Western Europe led to my becoming a parliamentary representative, at first for the Labor Party and, after October 2002, for the Liberal Party. My change of parties also stirred up strong feelings. In the United States, it would have been analogous to switching from the Democratic Party to the Republican. Some of my former party felt betrayed by my switch, but I viewed it as a practical matter. I believe I have more support in the Liberal Party for my mission to help Muslim women.

I am often asked why I, in particular, am so critical of Islam and of the position of women within Islam. I am accused of discrediting that religion through my opinions and comments. Allegedly, I portray
all
Muslim men as “stupid and violent louts who repress their women.” I am further blamed for playing into the hands of populists and racists, who will misuse my opinions to repress Muslims. Yet I continue to feel compelled to speak out against the way women are treated within the Muslim community. There are four reasons that I do this.

I hope to be able to make a contribution to ending the degrading treatment of Muslim women and girls by using my knowledge and experience of the Muslim faith. I am a passionate believer in universal human rights. As a member of the board of directors of Amnesty International, I am distressed that the vast majority of Muslim women are still enchained by the doctrine of virginity, which requires that women enter marriage as green as grass: experience of love and sexuality before marriage is an absolute taboo. This taboo does not apply to men. Furthermore, men and women do not have equal rights or opportunities in any way within their specific Muslim culture. Many women simply lack all opportunity to organize their lives independently or as they see fit.

I do not despise Islam. I am thoroughly conscious of the noble values that the religion promotes, such as charity, hospitality, and compassion for the weak and poor. But for women, the situation is very different. In the name of Islam, women are subjected to cruel and horrible practices, including female genital mutilation and disownment, the latter a common practice in which women are cut off from their families both emotionally and financially for any perceived misbehavior.

Obviously, far from all Muslim men are disrespectful or violent toward women. I know countless wonderful Muslim men who treat their mothers, sisters, and spouses decently. Moreover, men are every bit as much victims of the culture of virginity as women, albeit indirectly. As a result of this repressive culture, boys and men are not raised by healthy, balanced, and well-educated mothers. This in turn puts men themselves at a disadvantage when pursuing education, employment, and social development.

Because of the disproportionately strong emphasis on “manliness” in the Muslim upbringing and because of the physical and mental separation of the sexes, men hardly have the opportunity to develop the communication skills necessary for living harmoniously within a family. It is therefore not surprising that many Muslim women in the Netherlands complain that their husbands seldom talk to them. Muslim marriages, prearranged by the family when the daughter is very young, give men heavy responsibilities that are not of their own choosing—for girls they scarcely know.

These expectations often breed a lack of self-understanding and a lack of understanding of women. Feelings of anger and powerlessness are common among men. Moreover, if, as a man, you are raised with the idea that it is all right to hit a woman, then the step to using violence is only a small one. At the present time, women’s shelters in the Netherlands have a large influx of Muslim women seeking refuge from violent husbands. Separate shelters for Muslim girls escaping their parental homes have also been set up.

Ironically, the repression of women is maintained to a large extent by other women. Here is what Fatma Katirci, a Turkish
imama
(the female worshiper who leads the prayers of women who pray together—on the occasions when they can) in Amsterdam, says about the verse in the Koran that gives men the right to beat their wives: “The conflict cannot be about what will be on the table that night. It has to be about a serious issue, like a question of honor, such as infidelity. If a woman harms the family’s reputation through her behavior…You see, some women learn from just a good talk; others only think better of their actions if the beds are separated, and some are truly neurotic. For the latter, a little slap can be the very last resort to get them to see the error of their ways. Don’t misunderstand me: I’m against it. Beating is degrading, but if there’s really no alternative, then it has to happen.”

This statement reveals that even educated women often have difficulty relinquishing ideas that have been instilled in them since childhood. In the traditionally oriented Muslim communities, it is often the mothers who keep their daughters under their thumbs and the mothers-in-law who make the lives of their daughters-in-law unbearable. Cousins and aunts gossip endlessly about one another and about others. The effect of this social control is that Muslim women maintain their own repression.

The second reason for my critical stance is the danger that, without the emancipation of Muslim women, the socially disadvantageous position of Muslims will persist in Western countries as well as the entire world. I see a direct link between the poor situation of Muslim women, on the one hand, and the lagging behind of Muslims in education and the job market, their high rate of juvenile delinquency, and their heavy reliance on social services on the other. In reality, the upbringing of Muslim girls denies them personal independence and their own sense of responsibility, values that are essential for getting ahead in a Western country.

It is a dangerous development that the age at which girls can be married off in a country like the Netherlands, and in every Western country with a major Muslim minority, has dropped in the past few years. To marry someone off is to make a girl or young woman available to a man unknown to her who is then allowed to use her sexually. The younger the bride, the greater the chance she will be a virgin. In essence, what is involved here is an arranged rape approved of by her entire family. Marrying off usually implies the girl is not able or allowed to complete her education. Tragically, countless Muslim girls still have to comply with this practice.

Girls who are not successful in preserving their virginity or who are afraid (despite the fact that they have never had sex) that they won’t bleed on their wedding night resort to medical interventions that restore their hymens. Approximately ten to fifteen of these operations are performed in Dutch hospitals every month. As a result of the taboo on sex—and thus on sex education—Muslim girls and women end up with undesired pregnancies or infected with sexually transmitted diseases. The increase in abortions is directly related to the influx of Moroccan and Turkish women.

The third reason I am determined to make my voice heard is that Muslim women are scarcely listened to, and they need a woman to speak out on their behalf. Their official spokespersons are nearly all men. Given the widespread suffering of Muslim women, there are too few social organizations and political parties actively devoted to improving their lot. Spokesmen of Muslim organizations and immigrant politicians with Muslim backgrounds, along with other advocates of “group rights,” excel in denying, trivializing, or avoiding the enormous problems of Muslim girls and women in the West.

In a June 2002 interview, the member of parliament for the Socialist Party, Khadija Arib, said the following about the position of Muslim women: “People seem to think that immigrant women want to sit home alone all day, but this happens mostly because there is nowhere for them to go.” At the opening in spring of a mother-and-child daycare center in an Amsterdam suburb, she proposed establishing a special facility where women could attend activities all day long. In doing so, she denies the essence of the problem. In a large segment of the Muslim community, the notion still exists that women should not have any freedom of movement or work outside the home. Muslim women will benefit more from harsh criticism of this idea than from the creation of special women’s activity centers.

My final motive is my firm belief that the emphasis on a Muslim identity with corresponding “group rights” is detrimental to Muslim women. In 1999, Susan Moller Okin, a professor of political science and a feminist, launched a discussion in the United States between the advocates of multiculturalism, who favor the advancement and preservation of Islamic (or other) group cultures, and the opponents of multiculturalism, including Okin herself. In her view, the fact that many Western governments pursue a policy geared to the preservation of group cultures is in conflict with their constitutions which, after all, set down the principles of individual freedom and the equality of men and women. Among other criticisms, she points out that multiculturalists take no heed of the private lives of the cultures they are defending. And it is precisely in private life that differences in power and the repression of women manifest themselves most clearly.