í Assignments

I think Lughod’s critique on constructions of veiled women is that even though they achieved freedom from independence of the terrorist group they don’t take off their veiling. That is because of the way that their society is portrayed along with the cultural status and religion which may be different compared to how the others (west vs east) view it. I think the constructions of the veiled for women was meant to protect women allowing them to go outside. Lughod’s mentions how the veiling allows the women to do so while hiding/fulfilling something that feels right in their society, but compared to other society they look at it differently. Also by wearing these veiling it seems that the women has more freedom than if they don’t wear it because Lughod’s article mentions how women were able to go outside when they wear the veiling, whereas before when they didn’t it was impossible to do so. Maybe this is just the norm for society as the women who wears the veiling also means being a good respectable women.

The “vocations of saving others” is a the voice and opinion of people that think the muslim are being restricted when in reality they aren’t. The media portrays this differently and only goes after stories that will make them money, but they won’t show the unimportant things. For example when France had a terror attack the news were immediately covering that, but when another place that was also attacked by the terrorist there was no media coverage on it. This is because that other place was not as powerful as France and less important to the news. I think the “vocations of saving others” is just another way for the media to try to get people to show the Middle East which has a different culture, religion, lifestyle, practice, etc… compared to the place the media is comes/belongs to. In reality we don’t really know what the women in the Middle East wants like whether or not they want to wear the veiling or what happens if they don’t have to. The habit that their society has are completely different from ours and you can’t really change someones habit so that might have something to do with it.

In “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving,” Lila Abu-Lughod introduces constructions that Muslim women were going through. She argues about contemporary discourses on equality and freedom. War on terrorism brought dangers of reifying cultures. By such thoughts, serious appreciations among differences in cultures were disregarded. Abu-Lughod brings the issue of Muslim women, who were also often called as “women of cover,” and discomfort and plight those women were suffering. History of colonialism brought global injustice, and created limits of “cultural relativism.” Instead of analyzing the situations by political explanations, people focused on cultural framing of regions. Colonial feminism created signs of oppression, such as veils that women were forced to wear. Abu-Lughod cites words of Laura Bush, who said that the fight against terrorism could also be a fight for dignity of women. This form of veil called burqa, was originally derived from a region in Afghanistan. It was a convention for symbolizing women’s modesty, and separation of men and women’s spheres. However, feminists describe burqa as a portable seclusion. It became a symbol of oppression among Muslim women that now it means good respectable women for the family. Therefore, Abu-Lughod argues that we should develop awareness and concerns the Muslim women are facing. There should be no superiority over cultural “others.” She relates this idea to the title of the article, “Does Muslim Women Really Need Saving.” It is problematic to put them as someone in need of saving. Such ideas were results of superiority by people from other cultures. The concept of feminism campaigns could be shown in different forms according to regions. As Abu-Lughod states, political and economic views should not affect one’s cultural difference. Accepting the possibility of difference and respectfulness to other cultures would be the starting point for reform of thoughts and be helpful for those suffering from structural violence.

Lila Abu-Lughod writes a very matter-of-fact and powerful essay on Muslim women and if they need “saving”. Her purpose of the essay is not only to educate those who are ignorant or unaware of intricacies that go into veiling in Muslim countries, but also to argue that the Western way is not always the best way. She has a problem with the fact that Americans have construed this idea of Muslim women needing help, that the fact that they cover themselves means that these women have lost female agency and their voice. Americans think that because Afghan women did not tear off their burqas upon liberation, their oppression must run so deep that they must not understand how oppressed they are. Contrary to this belief, says Abu-Lughod, even if liberation let women choose whether to cover themselves or not, most Afghani women would choose to cover themselves in some way or another, perhaps more modestly. The burqa is tied to individualistic, societal, cultural and religious meaning. The author believes Americans have an “obsession” with the veil, and that there are more pressing issues to deal with when concerning ourselves with Muslim women.

While she does not come out and say it verbatim, I think Abu-Lughod would argue that Americans need to take a look at and criticize their own social issues before trying to make other countries their “project”. Ideas of globalization lead to a moral and social sense of superiority over the “others” that need saving. The fact is, Muslim women are not necessarily the ones coming out and asking for help. Further, the author says she does not know of one non-American woman that has ever said they wish to be more like American women. In order to present a case for female agency in any country, one must understand the significance of cultural difference and learn to accept that what is appropriate in other countries through customs and rituals is quite frankly, none of our business.

This conversation about Muslim women is as relevant now as it was 15 years ago, specifically because as a culture we still have no more understanding about Muslim women and the terror of their presence. Terror may seem excessive, but burqas on the beach seem to be an issue in the current French presidential elections which makes it seem like maybe it is us and not them that are we should be afraid of. Additionally, it has become common for some women to joke about the seclusion a burqa would provide, as if they would finally know what it feels like to walk down the street without being harassed.

The veiled woman has variations and although looking at it as a uniform, worker versus housewife, may seem oppressive, most women follow some sort uniform whether business casual or high fashion. To encourage or require a Muslim woman to unveil for her ‘comfort’ also known as our comfort seems equally reductive because issues of equality are more deeply rooted than clothing and remaining focused on clothes is like expecting a band aid to heal a broken bone. Abu-Lughod presents an excellent question when discussing liberating Afghan women, what do we do if liberation means something different to them, and when our need to fix things out weighs our understanding.

Our superiority driven desires to ‘save’ people is patronizing, but more than that it often seems like a short cut. If you can’t be bothered to do the work of learning about a culture and/or what your role in it is, but you can open a door to Westernize someone you are removing that person’s agency. It is only another role of expectations that the person had nothing to do with assuming, but is now left with the responsibility of maintaining. I agree in it being more valuable to shift the focus to demilitarizing and peacekeeping, but there is so much money to be made in a perpetual war state that I can’t imagine how it will change.

In her essay, “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving,” Lughod argues that discussions on human rights in the 21st century count on molds of Muslim women in a way.  The importance of the political, economic, and social conditions of Afghanistan women is often not supported although it is significant. One of the authors concerns in this article is focused on  how people always immediately target the cultural aspect, and religion of Muslim women instead of other details that define these women and their rights. She believes the government has closed them out from many things including citizenship rights and denies them the most basic rights that they should be entitled to. The aftermath 911 is responsible for the closed eyed view on these individuals, and not respecting their cultural differences.

She wants to explore the issues of Muslim women, Palestinian women, Israeli women, women under the Taliban and terrorists who are oppressed indefinitely and she defends their honor. For example being forced to wear the veil or the burqa which is a full body covering including the face which symbolized a women’s respectability and marked her appropriateness. The burqa has separated men and women with family and home, not with strangers. Wearing this burqa/veil symbolizes being a part of a specific community, and living in this ethical way under specific standards. Muslim men are actually repressing Muslim women as well, they are in no way liberated or saved as they should be. They have a right to global equality like anybody else, and the human right to be able to have enough to eat, shelter, jobs, and be free to do what they want in their own communities. These women need support and if they cant have a voice Lughod will try and be that voice for all them as a whole.

Due Monday, May 1st, by midnight. Word count: 300 words. Please make sure everything is in your own words. Absolutely no quotes should be used. If you paraphrase from the text (from Abu-Lughod’s work or anywhere else), you must be sure to include the proper citation (either MLA or APA).

In her essay, “Do Muslim Women Really Need Saving,” Lila Abu-Lughod argues that discourses on humanitarianism and human rights in the 21st century rely in some way on constructions of Muslim women. Drawing on details from the text, describe in your own words Lughod’s critique of constructions of veiled women and “vocations of saving others” (2002:789).

Since the early days, sex was always tied with economics.  For over many centuries, the sexual labour of women have been assimilated into the norms of economic and politics.

For women who occupy positions outside the heteronormativity, it was more difficult for them to live a normal lifestyle.  They were harassed and incarcerated for trivial matters. We also see a double standard in males and females when it comes to the sexuality.  Women were looked down upon or often seen as bad sexual subjects whereas male promiscuity is widely tolerated, or celebrated because of the “natural sexual inclination” males have.   Women have been the one to blame for prostitution, being seen as having no morals or lacking social values.  In the case of sex tourism, spokespeople often say that tourism is not the blame, instead it is the women to blame for their poor values. This idea about prostitution is flawed in many ways because prostitution wouldn’t be a thing if there weren’t people who actually wanted to be apart of it and seek it.  Also, prostitution is far more than just a moral issue. The economy in such countries with less restrictions on prostitution may have less job opportunities for women, causing them to rely on work such as being sex workers.

This shows how sex ties into economics. Although there can be some romantics encounters with the prostitution, it still is related with profiting of sexual labour. Also many women are looked down upon for being prostitutes because of their lack or morals or greediness, however, we also need to look into the jobs that are offered to women.  In most developing countries, jobs are very rare for women, especially poor women.  This may lead them into seeking jobs such as sexual labour just to make ends meet or suffice for their family/kids.

In “Between Love and Money: Sex, Tourism, and Citizenship in Cuba and the Dominican Republic” Amelia Cabezas discusses the concepts and deeper roots that have to do with the act of sex. In this case, she connects it to third world countries. She discusses the four S’s – sun, sand, sea, and sex. These four S’s are meant to create economic growth, as they attract international tourism. Soon enough, many studies have found that a large number of hosts and guests were being involved in sexual relationships, which explains the definition of the term sex tourism. Cabezas focuses on the benefits that sex brought about for individuals, especially women who look for advantages. These countries suffer from a lack of economic growth and political issues and, with time, sex labor became an accepted aspect of daily life. The growth of sex workers grew, people arrived at these countries in order to receive this special treatment. Besides the money, women also wanted opportunities and offers from men, such as emotional growth that could lead to marriage. It was a tactic that they adapted in order to strengthen their chances of a better life; an escape from their struggles and unfair exposure to the economic and social struggles of life in countries like DR and Cuba. Evidently, there was also inequality between female and male sex workers, as women are more likely to be judged or challenged by others because of their promiscuity. Men, on the other hand, have the advantage, as they are already seen as superior in society and do not have to be concerned with the discrimination or judgment on the same level as women. Ultimately, this idea of sex tourism is more than just an activity, but rather a socially accepted behavior. It is an act that is intertwined with romance, travel, marriage, and leisure, rather than just money.

In her “Between Love and Money: Sex, Tourism, and Citizenship in Cuba and the Dominican”, Amelia Cabezas explores sex tourism to deeply study the relationships, political and economic opportunities that the interaction between foreigners and locals propose. Sex tourism refers to both national and international travel purposely done for sexual activity or intimacy with natives of the land. Cabezas focuses on the international travel due to its prominence and roles that it plays in shaping a country’s social, political, and economic life. This focus includes third world countries, such as Cuba and the Dominican Republic, in which colonization may have affected in the past. Due to corruption, poor living conditions, and anarchism in those countries, the economy becomes very unstable and the dependence on foreign investments and currency becomes the driving force in economy of such countries. According to the article, this sector of the economy has surpassed other professions due to the opportunities that it provides the locals with. Incoming foreigners offer the locals many benefits such as income, materials, migration assistance, and in some cases even marriage. Although there are many social and economic benefits from sex tourism, a lot of problems also arise from it. Such conflicts concern the division of labor based on gender, class, and background, these issues mainly fall between natives causing a stigma on women labor. When a woman engages in sexual activity and sexual autonomy, she is a deviant that violates social and moral conduct. But on the other hand, when a man does it, his labor is praised and seen as a boost to the national economy and his sexual activity is justified as a natural male urge of sex. It is not only the women who are oppressed by the heteronormativity, it is also other minority groups such as palestinos, pingueros, and jineteros who face harassment by local authorities. I think that this is what Cabezas is referring to by “sexual citizenship”, it is the sexual identities that these workers hold.

In the past, there was a period that industrialization started and they needed more natural resources and labors. European colonizers started to invade other countries to achieve sexual conquest and exploitation. Caribbean region was colonized by the European countries. Cuban was one of the countries that colonized by Europeans. Since women was considered as properties during this period, sex was part of the economic and social process, so women was trafficking, and used for breeding of slaves, and hiring of the wet nurses to the use of concubine and prostitute (pg 988). Because of this colonization, world started globalization. Because of this globalization, it affects the definition of sex. Globalization developed sexual acts and identities. Since women was supposed to work, the only working force they had was their body, so women became prostitute and solt their body to earn money. According to Amelia Cabezas, sexual citizenship is a kind of relationship at the sex tourism. This term is saying that people who are offering the sexual acts have complete control of sexual right. She differentiate between sexual worker and people who are out of category, saying that society considered sexual worker as forced to offer sex, which caused by economic status or color of skin or gender, and looked down on them. People having sexual relationship with tourists because it earn better wages than other normal jobs. Things shown from people, particular for women who occupy positions outside “heteronormativity”, promises that come to these relationships are economic supports or ending this for better opportunity. Amelia Cabezas brought many examples to such as interviews. One of the example is the interview of Yolanda. She was a tourist, and as she worked in the area, she had meaningful relationship with tourists and eventually it returned to help to support her family.