Feminism's Place in Multicultural Societies at Risk

Contrasting Views on Multiculturalism and Women's Rights, and a Hypothetical Dialogue between Lila Abu-Lughod and Susan Moller Okin

Introduction

This essay examines the critical dialogue between Lila Abu-Lughod’s “Do Muslim Women Need Saving?” and Susan Moller Okin’s “Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women?” to explore the relationship between multiculturalism and women's rights. The focus is on hypothesizing how Abu-Lughod might respond to and critique Okin's views on multiculturalism's impact on women, drawing exclusively from their texts.

Susan Moller Okin's Argument in “Is Multiculturalism Bad For Women?”

Susan Moller Okin, in her essay, argues that multiculturalism can be detrimental to women's rights. She contends that many cultures have traditions and legal systems that subordinate women, and multicultural policies often protect these practices. For instance, she explains the tension between feminism and multiculturalism by citing the French accommodation of polygamy—which, she argues, “illustrates a deep and growing tension between feminism and multiculturalist concerns to protect cultural diversity. I think we—especially those of us who consider ourselves politically progressive and opposed to all forms of oppression—have been too quick to assume that feminism and multiculturalism are both good things which are easily reconciled.” Her point is that feminism is a culture all its own, and one that is marginalized the more other cultural values that are antagonistic to it are promoted and elevated.

Okin is particularly critical of how group rights can overshadow individual rights, especially those of women within minority cultures. Her central concern is that the pursuit of cultural preservation might come at the cost of gender equality. For example, when she defines both feminism and multiculturalism she does so by highlighting the intrinsic way in which the two concepts are inherently opposed to one another: “By 'feminism,' I mean the belief that women should not be disadvantaged by their sex, that they should be recognized as having human dignity equally with men, and the opportunity to live as fulfilling and as freely chosen lives as men can. 'Multiculturalism' is harder to pin down, but the particular aspect that concerns me here is the claim, made in the context of basically liberal democracies, that minority cultures or ways of life are not sufficiently protected by ensuring the individual rights of their members and as a consequence should also be protected with special group rights or privileges.” Thus, she argues that by advocating for group rights liberal democracies are advocating for cultural values that are anti-feminist and anti-woman. She notes, for example, that “Most cultures are suffused with practices and ideologies concerning gender. Suppose, then, that a culture endorses and facilitates the control of men over women in various ways (even if informally, in the private sphere of domestic life). Suppose, too, that there are fairly clear disparities of power between the sexes, such that the more powerful, male members are those who are generally in a position to determine and articulate the group’s beliefs, practices, and interests. Under such conditions, group rights are potentially, and in many cases actually, antifeminist.” In other words, multiculturalism takes back the ground gained by feminists over the past few decades and gives it to other groups.

Lila Abu-Lughod's Response in “Do Muslim Women Need Saving?”

Lila Abu-Lughod critiques the notion that Muslim women need to be "saved" by Western interventions. She argues against the universal application of Western notions of rights and feminism, emphasizing the need to understand the complexities within different cultures. Abu-Lughod suggests that the discourse on saving Muslim women often stems from a lack of understanding of their lived realities and a failure to recognize their agency. She challenges the Western perspective that tends to homogenize and simplify the experiences of Muslim women.

For example, Abu-Lughod discusses the political timing of a Time magazine cover story featuring a young Afghan woman whose nose had been cut off by her Taliban husband and in-laws. This story was used to imply that women would be the first victims if the U.S. left Afghanistan, despite the fact that such atrocities occurred even with U.S. and British troops present. This highlights how Western narratives often use the plight of Muslim women to justify political and military actions. She also reflects on the sudden Western interest in Muslim women post-9/11 and urges skepticism. She notes that this interest often resorts to cultural explanations, overshadowing political and historical contexts. This cultural framing, according to Abu-Lughod, is really what prevents a deeper understanding of the roots of human suffering in these regions.

She also criticizes the tendency to seek cultural or religious explanations for issues in Muslim countries, rather than exploring their political histories and global interconnections. She argues that this approach artificially divides the world and oversimplifies complex situations. And she discusses how the plight of Muslim women has been used to justify military interventions, drawing parallels with colonial history where the 'woman question' was often used to justify colonial rule. She cites examples from British colonialism in South Asia and French colonialism in Algeria, where women's issues were used to promote colonial policies. Overall, she criticizes the simplistic views of the West towards Muslim women, especially the notion that they need to be 'saved'. She argues that this perspective fails to the Muslim experience, Muslim societies and the agency of Muslim women.

Hypothetical Dialogue: Abu-Lughod's Critique of Okin

Abu-Lughod might respond to Okin by highlighting the dangers of imposing a universal standard of women's rights. She could argue that Okin's approach risks oversimplifying the diverse experiences of women in various cultures and potentially perpetuates a form of cultural imperialism. Her argument would be something like: Okin's universalist approach inadvertently promotes a form of cultural imperialism, where Western ideas and values are imposed on other cultures. This imposition is disrespectful to the sovereignty of these cultures and it also can undermine local women's movements that are working within their own cultural paradigms.

Abu-Lughod might also emphasize the importance of understanding women's rights within the context of their own cultures and histories, instead of through a purely Western lens. She would also likely highlight the need to avoid paternalism in discussions about women's rights. She could say that assuming a position of 'saving' or 'liberating' women from other cultures can sound patronizing and can be dismissive of their own efforts and struggles, which are good and valid on their own. Instead of doing this, she might call for a more collaborative and supportive approach that empowers women within their own cultural.

Intersection of Multiculturalism and Women's Rights

Both authors address the impact of cultural relativism on the perception and treatment of women. Cultural relativism is the idea that a person's beliefs, values, and practices should be understood based on that person's own culture, rather than be judged against the criteria of another culture. Abu-Lughod, in particular, emphasizes the importance of understanding cultural practices within their own contexts, while Okin is concerned that multicultural policies may exacerbate gender inequalities within cultural communities. This intersection exposes a need to balance respect for cultural diversity with the promotion of universal women's rights. This balance is challenging, however, because it involves walking the fine line between respecting cultural practices and ensuring that such practices do not infringe upon the fundamental rights of women. Addressing this challenge might require more dialogue and an ongoing conversation about universal human rights norms and cultural practices. It would have to include the concept of empowering women within their own cultural contexts to advocate for their rights and interpret their own experiences, as well.

Ethico-Political Dimensions of Human Rights Witnessing