I like the argument of Hirshikind and Mahmood about the limitation of looking at the concept of wearing the veil in black and white, and I would like to comment on that. Perhaps those feminists who are propagating the idea of liberating through the outer appearances are only artificially liberated themselves from their inner prejudices. They obviously have difficulties of noticing the subtle levels of inner liberations. Perhaps for some women who are wearing the headscarf it is an expression of their femininity.
I think instead of forcing masses to wear it or not to wear it, it should be more of a personal choice. Same with abortions or other personal-public dramatic matters. It is important to provide public education on the views for and against those passionate topics, but the 'end result' should be a personal decision based on many individual factors.
For some wearing the short sкirt can be viewed as the submission to patriarchal rule. For others it can be viewed as the expression of their feminine side, and therefore the liberation of their 'inner woman'.
The liberation is very questionable topic in itself. I think the most important is to keep liberating inside through all the levels of imaginary enemies and obstacles. If we believe that the problem exists, it becomes real. To deal with it is important in a balanced way, otherwise the solution or antidote for it becomes a problem in itself. But while we learn to hold the balance it is inevitable to be smashed to the opposite extreme, until we become more skillful in balancing in between the opposing extremes. I noticed it works the same way in private lives or public movements.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Islam and the War in Israel
Ernst brought up the idea which was so widely advertised through the media that very few people have brain and bravery to question it today. The idea of associating Islam with terrorism. Nevertheless, as people in general tend to fall into extremes and not-so-flexible views, those activists who justify Islam and Muslims today, found another 'enemy' to switch the blame onto, namely the Jews from Israel. I know many Jews who had to move out from Israel because of the worsening of social-political situation there. Some of them served in the army while were there. Because they were so close face to face with the 'enemy', meaning being scared on a daily bases of being killed at any time, they have a very particular attitude towards Arabs in general. Now, those activists who are trying to present Arabs through the media as 'innocent people', are really putting Israelian Jews in unwelcoming position.
My point is that justifying one 'nation' for the price of the other is useless effort. In other words justifying Muslims while blaming Jews in this particular example is not better than calling all Arabs terrorists. People in general rather than looking at a situation as the whole, have tendency to divide and separate, so there is always someone to blame. That kind of attitude never helps to resolve a conflict. It is unfortunate that uncontrollable anger leads to such disasters.
My point is that justifying one 'nation' for the price of the other is useless effort. In other words justifying Muslims while blaming Jews in this particular example is not better than calling all Arabs terrorists. People in general rather than looking at a situation as the whole, have tendency to divide and separate, so there is always someone to blame. That kind of attitude never helps to resolve a conflict. It is unfortunate that uncontrollable anger leads to such disasters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)