Ask the Women
Yes. I wondered about this a great deal at the time.
Girls do not figure in this “youth uprising”. Stones were thrown in Paris in 1968, too. But the barricades were occupied by men and women, even if the leaders were all men…It is all the more surprising that alongside the justified focus in the French and international press on the issue of racism, the sexism or machismo of these riots has barely been touched on.
Exactly. The riots were discussed as if they were – in however noisy or violent or overenthusiastic a way – representative of Muslim feeling in general. But why assume that? Why not think a little harder and realize that the rioters are all young males, and that not all Muslims are young males, and that violent young males don’t necessarily represent anyone but themselves? And especially, they don’t represent women.
The girls and women in these areas have long been living in fear. As well as being victims of violence within their own families more frequently than the average French woman, they are also at greater risk on the street. The Islamist-influenced boys and men divide women into two categories: saints and whores. The saints stay at home, the whores go out into the world. And they are made to pay. The price ranges from brutal street robberies, that affect women with striking frequency, through to what is called the ‘rotonde’: the form of gang rape to which Kahina’s sister Sohane was also subjected…[W]hen it gets dark and the rioting begins, there is not a single woman left on the streets. For on fiery nights like these, the “whores” are in just as much danger as the “sons of whores”.
Why did that go so unmentioned last autumn? Because it would or could have been seen as defending the discrimination and deprivation of the banlieus? Maybe. But that doesn’t do the girls and women much good, and they are after all half the people in question.
I did hear something about it on the BBC quite recently – well after the riots – a month or so ago, on the World Service, which irritates me so often. A reporter did an in-depth story on the subject, and talked to a group of girls at a community center. Why was it only young men in the riots? the reporter asked them. Because they don’t think, the girls said, they don’t think about what they’re doing, they just react, they don’t care if they hurt people or destroy things. There wasn’t a trace of sympathy or solidarity or admiration in their voices; they didn’t see the rioters as activists working for their betterment; they saw them as a lot of silly violent jerks. And then the reporter asked about male dominance in general, and those girls cut loose. They are angry, and it’s the men around them they’re angry at. ‘Our honour is in our bodies,’ one girl said indignantly. ‘Our bodies are our honour – they don’t belong to us.’
It’s extremely odd that commentary by outsiders so often – so nearly always – assumes that ‘Muslims’ all have the same basic interests and all think and feel as one. This kind of gulf isn’t small or trivial, yet it gets ignored. Very, very odd. Also stupid. Women may be the only hope.
I found interesting the comment that the 3rd generation of Muslim immigrants in France and Germany is much less integrated than the 1st or 2nd. The young men have appeared to turn their backs in resentment to French and German society while the women, in general, are keenly aware of the opportunities (especially through education) available to them for bettering their lives. I suspect this might be a reason for much of their attitude to the women of their generation – they’ve given up and they can’t stand to see the women get a chance.
A followup to my comment above. At the risk of overgeneralizing I think that the 1st generation immigrant women, coming in all liklihood from conservative Muslim and/or rural societies, were not aware of the opportunities available in western society for education and independence.
The second and the third generations, however, are, as I noted above, well aware of those opportunities and want to take advantage of them. I would say then that a paradox exists in that many of the disaffected young Muslim males are less integrated but there is a strong potential for young Muslim females to be more integrated, without losing touch with their religion.
These young women have much more to lose also. Perhaps the men have failed to educate themselves and find a position in French or German society – but they can still walk the streets openly and not risk the opprobrium of their culture for trying.
Is part of the reason, Matt, is that the society in general is less threatened by the women? Especially when the men adopt the more obnoxious and militant elements of either Islamic or American “street thug” culture.
OB: “Women may be the only hope.”
What about the woman in Palestine who is regarded as a saint because she has raised several sons (successfully) to be suicide bombers for Hamas?
I suppose she was brainwashed by a man, so it is still all men’s fault?
Not that I disagree with you entirely! Or even much!
Fundamentalism typically takes power from women and gives it to men. Accordingly, it seems likely that men are going to be more opposed than women, except for some women who (for reasons I will never comprehend) are happy with that situation. And men are more inclined to react violently…
Whilst reading this article I was remionded again of that extraordinary meeting between Richard Dawkins and the ex-Jewish now Muslim man in Jerusalem, when the latter kept referring to ‘your’ women and Dawkins kept protesting ‘they’re not mine’. The rage against women dressing, talking or acting as they wanted to was truly terrifying.
I tend to bang on about her a bit, but I don’t think you can get a much better analysis from the on-the ground, hardworking, campaigning MP for Keighly, Ann Cryer. The clarity she brings to these issues, specifically in terms of women’s rights and representation is 20/20, and she represents thousands of 1st/2nd/3rd & 4th generation immigrants of all layers of Muslem faith, in a very poor Northern town. She really should get a lot – a lot – more press, I can’t fault her angle on democratic representaion and getting involvement in and commitment to the democratic process from ordinary people, which for a Labour MP in this era is pretty damn rare.
“The rage against women dressing, talking or acting as they wanted to was truly terrifying.”
And absolutely typical (of that particular mindset, I mean). That’s what it’s all about – getting women back under firm control.
Do bang on about Ann Cryer, Nick; I agree with you, she should get a lot more press. Sacranie should get less, Cryer should get more – simple.