Sing it, Deeyah
Oh, really; how pretty. How perfectly lovely.
A Muslim pop singer has been forced to hire bodyguards to protect her during a visit to Britain next month after she received a string of death threats from religious extremists. US-based Deeyah is due in London next month to promote a new single and video, released tomorrow. But the track “What Will It Be?” has already outraged hardline Islamists here as it promotes women’s rights.
Yes, well, you can see why that would outrage people, promoting women’s rights. Women can’t, shouldn’t, mustn’t have any rights, because the whole point, or almost the whole point, of hardline Islamism is to take rights away from women. Take that away and what’s left? Okay, there’s some fun left – executing a teenage girl because she stabbed one of three men who were intent on raping her and her teenage niece, for instance, and hand-amputation, and execution of gays – of course those are all good, but they don’t match the fun of keeping women squashed and oppressed, now do they. Use your head.
Her performances with a clutch of male dancers and revealing outfits have also deeply offended many Muslims. In one scene in her latest video, the singer drops a burqa covering her body to reveal a bikini.
‘Deeply offended’ – well we can’t have that. No no no no no – if there is anything the past few weeks have taught us, it is that ‘deeply offending’ many Muslims – no matter what footling thing ‘many Muslims’ choose to be ‘deeply offended’ by – is Forbidden. Or else dangerous. One of those – we seem to have a little trouble making up our minds which.
That has attracted vitriol from some quarters. The 28-year-old singer claims that in the past she has been spat upon in the street and told that her family would be in danger if she did not tone down her work…”I have been on the verge of a breakdown. Middle-aged men have spat at me in the street and I have had people phone me and tell me they were going to cut me up into pieces. I became this figure of hate simply because of what I do and wear.”
Well, yeah – because you’re a woman, see, and what you do and wear is not up to you to decide, because of your being a woman. See?
Deeyah, who was born in Norway of Iranian and Pakistani parentage, remains keen to return to Britain. “I miss London,” she said, adding that she wanted to inspire British Muslim women. “I receive letters and emails from women saying I am doing a good job. Putting my life at risk no longer bothers me. That so many women – Muslim women included – are abused by people in their own religion and communities does.”
Yeah. It bothers a lot of us. Go, Deeyah; good luck; peace be upon you. Not figurative peace, not in heaven peace; real peace; no harm.
So where do we go from here? What is the wise/astute/effective way to deal with children? I am at a loss. Placating them in the George Bush/Bill Clinton manner is obviously a bad thing to do. But simply republishing the cartoons (and whatever comes next) is also silly. How does one deal with fascists within our own society? I have no doubt that we will soon see demands that the bacon/lettuce/tomato sandwich be banned from “public accomodations’ such as restaurants because it “deeply offends” Moslems.
Should we start thinking about inviting Moslems who live in the USA but who are not happy with a secular culture to return to their home countries?
‘I have no doubt that we will soon see demands that the bacon/lettuce/tomato sandwich be banned from “public accomodations” such as restaurants because it “deeply offends” Moslems.’
In an effort to be fair to everyone, I suggest the following: there is a great difference between cartoons of Muhammed and restaurants selling bacon dishes. The analogy would work better if there were a law requiring that all butchers and all restaurants sell pig products.
Muslims feel ownership of Muhammed and so get upset when outsiders make what they see as an attack on him. They feel no such ownership of rules regarding pig products because pigs and their products are not specific to Islam. (I know, the situation is more nuanced that this, but I am making it a little starker to illuminate their mindset).
“They feel no such ownership of rules regarding pig products…”
But it’s their rules! I believe the general term is “halal” for things allowed, and pork is one which is not. So how can you suggest that they won’t care?
This issue has been discussed many places but it is only forbidden to Muslims to show pictures of Mohammed. In theory, it shouldn’t be a problem if a non-Moslem paints his image. But obviously it is. Their religion — like most religions in early stages of eveolution — is authoritarian and wants everyone to obey. At least that’s the message which the Moslems are putting out.
Not the Muslims, RDC – only some. It’s the shouters who get the attention (that’s the point of shouting, after all), but they don’t speak for everyone.
It wouild be nice if you were correct, OB.
But I hear NO American Moslems saying anything of any consequence. There is virtually no Moslem presence in the intellectual sphere in the USA. Perhaps they too are cowed by their own radical co-religionists? In ancy case, the shouters appear to speak for the majority.
And just by way of comparison, do you realize that the population of Moslems and of Jews in the USA is somewhere near the same, at least as a proportion to the total USA population?
Anyway as to BLTs, don’t be surprised if they become an issue.
Perhaps this analogy might clarify:
I have a sister. I would be very upset if someone abused her. I also believe that people should treat their sisters with a certain respect – I have rules about how people should treat them. However I would be far more upset if someone abused my sister than if I saw someone abusing his sister. I do not expect everyone to keep to my rules on how to treat sisters in general, but I do expect that my sister be respected.
Pace G. Tingey, I have done nothing more than attempted to provide an insight into the protesters’ mindset. I am here neither justifying nor attacking anything.
BTW: if you can find one, try attackng the wooliness of John Lennon’s thinking to one of his fans. The reaction will be over-the-top too.
Paul Power: please give an example of John Lennon’s wooliness. I would think of myself as a fan, but John had his faults like everyone else and I might see it as defensible or not.
And don’t forget that he was writing three minute songs. Not the best place to discuss complex ideas, but still two minutes and 45 seconds longer that some political leaders take to express their ideas.
Unless I have missed Paul’s point and should over-react.
I think I would only over-react if tou wheeled out Yoko.
Sorry about my contribution as it takes us away from the main theme.
Can I just express my disgust at the attacks and threats on Deeyah. You could say that she was asking for it with the burka to bikini trick (I haven’t seen it), but that is simple knee jerk defending of the idiots. What is their problem with this?
Either they don’t like looking at women, in which look away or lock themselves up so they don’t have to, or they like looking too much and get all hormonal. If the latter is the case, then women are not the problem, they are and the solution to their problem is the same as before – look away or lock themselves up. Do you think this will work for Abu Hamsa?
“an example of John Lennon’s wooliness” – the lyrics of “Imagine”.
The point I was getting at was that idolatry is not confined to religion and that we all can overreact to slurs on what we hold sacred.
“the whole point, or almost the whole point, of hardline Islamism is to take rights away from women“.
Hardline Islamism?
What’s the softline version?
Doesn’t sound much better to me:
“Poll reveals 40pc of Muslims want sharia law in UK”
Source:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/19/nsharia19.xml
Paul, by ‘abuse’ do you mean verbally abuse, or the more usual meaning? It makes a large difference! I took you to mean physically abuse at first.
But even if you mean something like ‘insult’, I think the analogy is still unhelpful. Contemporary sisters and brothers are (I’m assuming – you didn’t specify that either) living people, with living feelings. Abusing living people who have feelings, whether physically or verbally, is an entirely different matter from verbally or pictorially abusing or mocking someone who has been dead for 14 centuries. The analogy would have to be to someone long dead who is held ‘sacred’ by people who are not related to said stiff. Shakespeare if you like, or King Arthur, or Pericles. Shakespeare is good, since you mention that “idolatry is not confined to religion” and, usefully, Ben Jonson explicitly disavowed precisely “idolatry” in his affection for Shxpr (‘for I loved the man, and do honour his memory, this side idolatry, as much as any’). He was implicitly contrasting his own attitude with people who, even then, did have an idolatrous view of Shxpr – he found the idolatry unwarranted and irritating. (Though he may have changed his mind about that a few years later, when he wrote the poem for the First Folio – it’s a pretty idolatrous poem. The thought is that he read all the plays together, and was somewhat staggered.)
Come to think of it, there were riots in New York in the 19th century – street fights between fans of two rival Shakespearian actor-managers – Macready and someone else, I think. How interesting…
Interesting that my BLT scenario gets the attention but no one seems to have any responses to “So where do we go from here? What is the wise/astute/effective way to deal with children? I am at a loss. Placating them in the George Bush/Bill Clinton manner is obviously a bad thing to do. But simply republishing the cartoons (and whatever comes next) is also silly. How does one deal with fascists within our own society?”
Cathal, I linked to that article yesterday.
What’s the difference? Well for one thing, there is the other 60%. For another thing, even if many or some non-Islamist Muslims want women not to have rights (a very big if), that doesn’t mean it’s their whole or almost whole point. Islamists are obsessive about it, and that’s what I was saying. And for a third thing, don’t forget that more than half of Muslims are women, and they’re not likely to be quite as universally keen on the idea as men are. I think the chances are good that quite a few of them are strongly opposed to the idea.
“…there is a great difference between cartoons of Muhammed and restaurants selling bacon dishes.”
The difference might be only in the degree to which Moslems are “deeply offended”and ready to kill. The normal human reaction is to be offended by practices different from their own. I know vegetarians who find it unpleasant to be at dinner with someone eating a steak. They get over it. I suspect that Moslems, once they have tasted blood, will simply keep demanding more concessions.
Btw, one other thing which is interesting: where are the American/European Moslems? Why don’t they ever take part in these discussions? Why are they so invisble? It’s weird.
RDC, you seem to be conjuring up fantasy nightmares, and you also seem to be equating the particular Muslims who protest violently (a tiny minority) with all Muslims. It ought not to be necessary to point out that that’s not accurate. Not all Christians love Pat Robertson, and not all Muslims love Islamists. To conflate all Muslims with Islamists is just to give the Islamophobiawatchers ammunition.
Does anyone here ever log in to Fafblog?
Its URL is <http://fafblog.blogspot.com/2006/02/god-doesnt-read-funnies-what-if-its.html>
The post for Sunday,05 Feb is a sharpish commentary on cartoons, gods, and similar chimerae.
OB,
I used to think that was so — that there are indeed moderate Muslims — but the reaction to the cartoons and even more importantly, the absence of Muslims from the sort of sane conversation which you (and other bloggers) host makes me wonder if there are very of them who are intellectually engaged. I am not suggesting that they are all radicals — but do they have sort of tradition of open and frank discussion? If so, where are they? Not to get too personal but do YOU know any Muslims? Are you engaged in any personal conversation with any? Does anyone here know any? And can you talk to them in a frand and cordial way? is there any chance for real communication with them?
The cant which even the “moderates” spew makes me wonder.
RDC, have a look at Pickled Politics, and of course at Irshad Manji. She makes the same point about open and frank discussion – that there’s not enough of it, and let’s change that. Ijtihad, she says it’s called, and it is a real tradition in Islam, but it’s been sidelined lately; she wants to revive it. Give her your support!
I agree that even many ‘moderates’ talk a lot of pious cant, but all the same I think it’s important not to conflate that with violence or the advocacy of same.
Also Ishtiaq Ahmed. He’s an academic in Sweden; writes terrific pieces for the Pakistani ‘Daily Times’ (I think). Look him up.
G.
Who is ‘them’ and what exactly do you mean by ‘Slap them down’?
Right now, I couldn’t care about religion, about tolerance or about respecting other peoples’ beliefs.
When a woman feels that she is unable to visit the UK without first hiring bodyguards, something has gone SERIOUSLY wrong.
Am I the only one deeply offended by the way many Muslims treat women? Why aren’t I and others similarly offended taking to the streets and burning effigies of Mohammed in protest? Why do many Muslims care so much more about what they believe in than we care about what we believe in? Are they tactlessly exaggerating the importance of their sensibilities, while we timidly cower behind the shamefully soggy relativism that says “it’s okay to treat women as you because that’s part of your culture.”
The last line should read “it’s okay to treat women as you DO because that’s part of your culture.”
‘Am I the only one deeply offended by the way many Muslims treat women?’ Probably not. As has been mentioned once or twice, quite a few muslim women are as well.
‘Why aren’t I and others similarly offended taking to the streets and burning effigies of Mohammed in protest?’
An interesting way of expressing your concern for muslim women. they’ll be so grateful.
‘Why do many Muslims care so much more about what they believe in than we care about what we believe in?’
Who’s ‘we’, in this instance? I have no idea what you believe, or how strongly you believe it.
I suspect that the root of the problem of the Muslim world is male fear of sex…all versions.
They appear to have a peculiar combination of
• fear of homosexuals with
• fear of women with
• running in male packs.
RDC, that would make them like pretty much all pre-enlightenment authoritarian social/ideological structures, then…
Cutting through all the blather, the key reason that Islamism is evoking so much weak-kneed concern is its adherents’ absolute willingness to threaten opponents with death, and apparent disregard for the consequences of being caught fulfilling that pledge. They really do think they answer only to a higher power, and that their enemies have earned their fate.
What would be needed to eradicate the implications of this mindset would be a multi-dimensioned assault — challenging the right of religion to intrude into science, to threaten freedom of speech, and to deny free choice to womne, inter alia — led and protected by the power of the state [why? Because only states have the power to extend the necessary protection]. Unfortunately, there is a word for that in the current context, and that word is ‘crusade’. Even if ‘we’ tried to make the ‘mission’ non-violent, we wouldn’t be able to — peace takes 2, war only 1…
This ‘crusade’ isn’t going to happen, not least because it would result in the oil-supply from the ME being turned off like a tap. Instead we may have to settle in for our own cultural version of Sunny Rumsfeld’s ‘long war’ — deeply unpleasant, rarely victorious, often set back, but inescapable conflict over the fundamentals of civilised existence.
I thought Paul Power might be having a go at Imagine, which is odd, in that it is one of the least woolly songs I know.
In three minutes it quite clearly states a position on a type of atheism. Some reflection on it means that I don’t hold to it 100% (e.g. no possessions – what happens to my CDs), but much of it I do agree with.
Also a great song to sing when the god-botherers are going door-to-door; it worked the last time. They didn’t bother visiting.
Re; Imagine
I think it was Paul Merton who, when somebody remarked that the motto of Liverpool Airport was ‘Above us only sky’, replied ‘That’s a coincidence, the motto of Liverpool baggage handlers is ‘Imagine no possessions’.’