The Associated Press recently released a news piece titled by my local paper “Love story bolsters Islam’s image.” From the title alone, you’d think that Islam has never had a love story. The story implies that the film it covers is the first to portray Islam positively. We here at MMW tend to cover negative portrayals of Muslim women more often than positive ones, but we don’t go as far as to think that positive portrayals don’t exist. But from reading this article it’d be easy to think that there has only been one film featuring positive Muslim characters.

AP reporter Zakki Hakim looks at Ayat-Ayat Cinta (Verses of Love), a recent box-office hit in Indonesia (poster pictured right). The film tells the story of Fahri Adbullah Shiddiq, who goes to Egypt to study the Qur’an at Al-Azhar University. It has been praised for showing Islam positively, “based on love, patience and sacrifice,” in the words of the director, Hanung Bramantyo. It’s a notable and important goal.

According to the article, the film is “one of the first here to intertwine religion and popular culture on the big screen.” From the edits my local paper made to the AP full version, this alone became the focus of the article. What a depressing message — positive portrayals of Islam are noteworthy just for being positive.

Fans are quoted as hoping the film teaches viewers about Islam, Muslims — and the treatment of women. This is where it’s potentially troublesome.

All that’s clear about the women in the film is that Fahri has a lot of them. Fahri “struggles to choose a wife among four beautiful and distinctly different women.” He marries one, and then finds it necessary to marry another. Polygamy is “controversial” in Indonesia, according to the article, and Fahri again “struggles” to treat his wives equally, but the article doesn’t dwell further on the issue. I don’t know how the film deals with the topic. It’s possible it investigates the issue of polygamy with the complexity and maturity it deserves. And it’s noted that Fahri passes on “gentle issues about tolerance, corruption, women’s rights, and interfaith relations.”

But without watching the film — only available in Indonesia — we can’t know how it ends up. Instead, it sounds like the message imparted about women is that Muslim men don’t just marry one. That isn’t a reflection of the majority of Muslims’ marriages, and it’d be nice to hear about Muslim women who are more than just “beautiful and distinctly different.”

But despite its flaws, the article reflects Muslims who believe in a peaceful, tolerant Islam. That’s never something to complain about.

I was walking through the aisles in the grocery store the other day when a particular product made me do a double take. I had to backtrack so I could see if what I thought I saw was what I actually saw. And unfortunately it was. It was a box of Canadian label President’s Choice "Memories of Marrakesh" couscous with a picture of the face of a niqab clad woman! And not one, but two.

Once again the veil has been utilized, in a completely irrelevant circumstance, to represent the Muslim world. Although this product was purposely associated with Morocco, couscous is a grain which is commonly associated with the Middle Eastern region, therefore tying this image in with the entire region. Once again. Never mind that the majority of women in the region do not wear the niqab. Never mind that 1000 other images could have been used to represent Morocco. And never mind that this picture, unlike those of many of their other products, was inauthentic. On their "Memories of India" masala chai, they use a picture of the Taj Mahal. Very Indian. On their "Memories of San Fransisco" they display the famous trolley. Very San Fran. After all, when one "remembers" Morocco one "remembers" the barely existent niqabi woman, and not the omnipresent mesmerizing architecture, mosques, or traditional markets.

President's Choice exploits and uses orientalist thinking to sell their product. With the kohl laden eyes of the niqabi woman one becomes aware of her femininity; her sexuality. In line with orientalist thought, she is the oppressed and sexualized woman, luring you to try some couscous; eager and ready to serve you as her submissive nature would dictate. The memories of this exotic creature should make one nostalgic enough to buy this product.

Now President’s Choice has for a long time been appropriating various cultures to sell their food products. With names such as “Memories of Punjab,” “Memories of Bangkok” “Memories of Greece” etc. they try to tap into and exploit the nostalgia one would undergo with having experienced the culture. A low and insulting but unfortunately common move in North American markets. However, using a woman's body for this product becomes further insulting and sinks lower. The offensive implications of such images were irrelevant in face of the bottom line.

The pictures on their products vary, though the majority do not involve actual people, though they appear to be related to the region. Therefore, of the many pictures which could represent Morocco, I can't help but get irritated and suspicious about their choice when their trend has been otherwise.

MMW thanks Anne for the tip!

The soap opera As the World Turns has recently introduced a Muslim character: Ameera Ali Aziz, an Iraqi woman. Played by the Iranian-American Tala Ashe, Ameera appears one day and becomes entangled in the other characters’ lives.

Here’s the basic summary: Following the death of her mother, who was in a relationship with an American soldier, Ameera is shunned by every single member of her community and must flee to the United States. There she finds Noah, son of the American colonel (somehow she already knows what he looks like and where his favorite hang-outs are). Noah, who has recently come out about his relationship with his boyfriend, Luke, decides to marry Ameera after Homeland Security officers threaten to send her back to Iraq because of an expired visa. The most recent episode featuring the characters showed the wedding.

Ameera’s religion is never explicitly stated, but she wears a hijab and there are vague references to Islam. The show exudes great ignorance about both Islam and foreign cultures. When a little girl points to a bowl and asks, “What are those?” Luke’s mother proudly proclaims, “These are dates. It’s a Muslim tradition. It’s amazing how much you can find out online.” I didn’t realize it took meeting a Muslim for an Americans to hear of dates. (All non-Muslim American readers, click here immediately. We can’t let you proceed without knowing about the first requirement of Islam.)

The show gives several indications of gender inequality in Iraq. When walking together, Noah asks Ameera if he needs to slow down. She responds that she’s “accustomed to always walk a few steps behind the men.” (As though a woman who just made her way from Iraq to an obscure small town of Illinois, with no one and nothing to guide her, would follow this stereotype of Islamic culture.) She also tells the two gay characters, “In my culture, men and women don’t sleep in the same room unless they’re married.” Or ride in a car together. Noah and Luke accept all this information at face value, because Ameera is clearly the first Iraqi or Muslim they’ve met. While they make adjustments for Ameera’s comfort, Noah and Luke ease her into “American culture.” She agrees to sleep in the same room, ride in the car, and lets them take her to a college dance (the hallmark of the university experience, apparently). They encourage her to dance with the first boy who asks her — and obedient girl that she is, she does so until he puts his arms around her and and she runs away. There’s no explanation of her behavior, only the conclusion that she’s “not ready.” (After all, just not being comfortable with dancing with boys you’ve never met is not an option.) There’s a strong feeling of condescension. Everyone is very polite to Ameera, but it’s clear that the (stereotypical) Iraqi culture she speaks of needs the improvement known as Americanization. (As though American culture, too, is a monolith.)

I’m also not a fan of how the United States is painted as a flawless beacon of freedom. When Ameera notices a bookshelf, she exclaims, “So many books! And people can read whatever they want without censorship.”

Her American host replies, “I thought there was more freedom in Iraq.”

Ameera says, “There is, but change takes time.”

When Ameera mentions suicide bombings in Iraq, it only serves to contrast the safety of the United States. Ever wonder why Iraq is so unstable right now? It has something to do with an American invasion. But not according to the show. It seems, instead, to be an inherently messed-up country. And based on Ameera’s “my culture” claims, you could never imagine that strong, independent Iraqi women exist — that is, without adopting American ways.

After all, Ameera exemplifies the Victorian archetype of a demure woman. Wide-eyed and naive, she smiles sweetly, she offers to wash the dishes, and she does her best to do all that’s instructed of her. She comes off as helpless and constantly in need of a man’s guidance. When Noah tells her of his plan to marry her so that she can stay in the country, he doesn’t ask. Even a marriage of convenience that assumes she’ll agree could have a kneeling scene — come on, this is a soap. Instead, Noah states directly, “You and I are getting married.” A bit ironic, considering Western attitudes on arranged marriages. And has he ever considered that she may not want the tangle of lies that their fake marriage would ensue? Or the awkwardness of “marrying” a man she hardly knows? Nevertheless, she responds as though it had been done properly: “Yes, Noah, I will marry you.” I hope Noah got the hint.

I’m not used to how much suspension of disbelief watching a soap opera (and the painful stereotypes) requires, but it seemed odd to me that Ameera speaks flawless English (except for not understanding a few slangy expressions), when this is her first interaction with American culture. It’s obvious the actor doesn’t speak Arabic, based on how she pronounces “Ameera Ali Aziz” and the word “Muslim.” Despite this and all that’s been mentioned, she believes herself to be portraying Middle Eastern culture both accurately and positively. (Which Middle Eastern culture is this, by the way? There do happen to be a lot.)

Islam is rarely mentioned specifically. Ameera says at one point, “In Islam, men and women dine separately.” (Why didn’t she refer to the vague Middle Eastern culture here? I don’t remember that passage of the Qur’an. It looks like CAIR doesn’t either.) But like the dance, this is something Ameera begins to abandon as she slips into an American identity. In another scene, Ameera tells her new family that she is “not comfortable” having the wedding in a church and instead requests a ceremony in the backyard, with a person “neither Christian or Muslim” officiating. As I understood it, if it’s going to be a fake marriage, she doesn’t want to bring religion into it. It would be interesting to see the show go into greater depth about the religious implications of this “marriage in name only.” Noah, after all, is still involved with Luke, their relationship back in the closet. Another factor is Noah’s religion. The writers don’t seem aware that their version of Islam, in which men and women eat separately, certainly wouldn’t allow a Muslim woman to marry a Christian man. Then again, the big question is: Do they know anything about Islam?

But the show could be worse. After all, Ameera is a likable character (as victims usually are). She clearly states that she has no connections to terrorism. She’s even sympathetic about the negative reactions to Noah and Luke’s relationship (after she meets the first gay people she’s ever known, since of course Iraq is just another Iran). Islam is part of her identity, but not consumed by it. It’s tragic that what should be taken for granted is lacking in most portrayals of Muslims on American TV.

Maybe I have exaggerated hopes for a soap opera, where drama rules and reality takes a back seat, but it would be nice to see a more complex Muslim character. Besides confirming every stereotype about gender issues in the Middle East, Ameera comes off as a one-dimensional nice girl who just needs some American training before she can become the perfect submissive (American) wife. She learns about the United States from her hosts, but she never teaches them anything about Iraqi culture. Perhaps it’s because the writers, satisfying themselves with putting dates on a table, haven’t done any research into what Iraqi culture actually is.

You can watch the episodes on CBS’s website. See episodes airing February 22 through March 12 for Ameera’s appearances. If you’d rather not suffer the pain of full-length episodes, check out clips on YouTube.

I recently came across what I thought of as a beautiful poem, entitled I Am Woman - Celebrate Me, written by Canadian Muslim feminist and activist, Raheel Raza. Addressing issues of sexism, racism, and misogyny among others, this poem was written by Raza and presented to WOMANVOICE, on Dec 6, 2004 to celebrate the International Day of Action for Violence Against Women and to commemorate the 14 women killed at Ecole Polytechnic in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, (aka The Montreal Massacre). Although a few years old I felt this deserved some attention.

Racism, imperialism, violence, sexism, misogyny, patriacrhy:

Last month, Zeynab commented on the portrayal of Muslim women in the Vagina Monologues, noting that there are no portrayals of positive sexual experiences by Muslim women. I attended a performance of the Vagina Monologues for the first time last week and noticed her observations. Indeed Muslim women were lacking from the moaning sketch. In “My Vagina Was My Village,” a Bosnian woman in a headscarf described the horrors of rape. But there was another sketch that addressed Muslim women, or at least women in a Muslim country. It stood out, because not only did it not portray sexuality positively, it didn’t portray it at all — unlike all the other sketches.

“Under the Burqa” was inspired by writer Eve Ensler’s visit to Afghanistan, where she saw “what misogyny would look like if it were allowed to totally fulfill itself.” I agree that the Taliban’s treatment of women is absolutely deplorable, inhumane, and wrong. But while the Vagina Monologues is about female empowerment, it explores this issue through sexuality. After all, it’s the Vagina Monologues, not the Female Monologues. All of the other sketches in the performances were about women’s experiences with, relationship to, or attitudes about their vagina. “Under the Burqa,” however, describes the dehumanization of women under Taliban rule. Not once is sexuality mentioned. (Nor was it, for that matter, a monologue.)

Of course, it is possible to relate misogyny to female sexuality specifically. Female genital mutilation (FGM) was mentioned briefly in an interstitial, but not expanded upon. It would be the perfect example of when misogyny meets vaginas. But while FGM didn’t merit a full sketch, “Under the Burqa,” with not one mention of sexuality or vaginas, did.

This struck me as a little odd.

MMW thanks Salma for the tip!

Just like Qur’an recitation, devotional music is often designated the realm of men. Women’s voices are often thought to be too erotic to sing or perform religious content — they sway men to sinful thoughts when they should be focusing on God. But some women have broken from behind this barrier and used their voices to rise to be national and international figures. One such women is Abida Parveen of Pakistan. A singer in the traditions of qawwali, ghazal, and kafi, Parveen ranks among the best-known Sufi performers, a female amongst many males.

Begum Abida Parveen was born in 1957 in Larkana, Pakistan. Her father, Ghulam Haider, a singer and disciple of Sindh and Punjab mystical poets, ran a music school for boys. He began to teach and encourage his daughter when he recognized her talent. An alto, Parveen sings in Urdu, Sindhi, Hindi, Punjabi, and Seraiki. She composes her own music and accompanies it with lyrics from Sufi poetry.

What’s notable about Parveen is that she stands out for her talent, not her gender. Look up any of the styles Parveen performs and her name will come up. She has been reviewed by newspapers across the world, from the New York Times to Spain’s El País to the Straits Times of Singapore, and reviews are overwhelmingly positive. The Daily Telegraph of London described her as “one of the world’s great singers — even if you can’t understand her,” a claim echoed by the another London paper, the Evening Standard, which added this description of Parveen’s performance: “It’s as if she’s commanding the universe.” In the words of the Economic Times of India, “Be it the music critic or the layman, who loves music, all believes that Begum Abida Parveen is unarguably one of the finest voices in the Orient and the queen of mystical singing. Her passionate, robust voice spans three octaves and her powerful renditions of devotional music, her fervid and inspirational singing is an experience not to be missed.”

Parveen is frequently compared to the late Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, a fellow Pakistani Sufi star, who carries significant name recognition even in the West. The Nepali Times described her “Pakistan’s ‘female Nusrat.’” Music critics who call Khan the “king of Sufi music” name Parveen as the queen. Parveen is a rare figure in the world of Islamic music because of her gender, but she rejects the idea that women should not participate in religious music. Asked at a press conference, she said,

“We are all the same species — all humans have a representative of godliness, so there is really no male/female division. I have been given this gift by the Divine, who does not recognize differences between male and female singing. I am simply a medium, and if you listen to me sing, even over the period of a few days, it will be entirely different because the transmission is from the Divine.”

It’s disappointing that there aren’t more female performers of Islamic music, but Abida Parveen shines brightly as an example of what Muslim women can achieve.