Femen vs MWAF

Just like FEMEN cannot speak for all feminists, MWAF or other veil-endorsing Muslim feminists are not the sole voice of all Muslim women

Bearing out a common man's pet peeve, Sigmund Freud had famously confessed that despite spending years in psychological research and study of the feminine soul, he couldn't find an answer to the question, ‘What does a woman want?’

Freud's question, no matter how trite or sexist, remains pertinent and pressing even today, especially in the context of the debate over the relevance and significance of the feminist movement.

In 1968, women activists tossed their bras and high heels in trash cans to protest against sexual commodification of women at Miss America beauty pageant. In 2011, women called for a global slut-walk to demonstrate against rape where protesters dressed in high heels and lingerie. At the same time, there are authors like Ariel Levy warning us of an insidious ‘raunch culture’ terribly undermining the feminist objectives and the assertions of female sexual desires.

While the features and objectives of the first and second wave feminist movement were fairly obvious, the third wave feminism seems stuck on the correlation between power and feminine sexuality. Most of the contemporary feminist debate revolves around the western view of sexual liberalism. Lounge discussions on women-lib usually resonate either the Natasha Walters version of  exploitation of hyper-sexualised female dolls or the strength of Kathrin Hakim strategy of investing an erotic capital to break free from the masculine control and beat the men at their own game.

The feminist movement is constantly in transition as proponents of women liberation have not yet reached a globally acknowledged theoretical framework, therefore, its features remain controversial and murky. Whether feminism wears Gabriel Solis’ heels or Rihana’s thongs? Does it sport the veil of Tawakal Karman or does it don Sheryl Sandberg’s corporate attire? Why do the Vandna Shiva or AsmaJahngir brands of feminism are not projected as hip as all above? A great problem with the feminist theory is that its proponents have not yet defined or reached the consensus on the ‘female self’  around which the whole feminists movement revolves , thus the confusion within the adherents of gender equality.

An ideal modern feminist ‘could be’ a blend of Simone de Bouvre's brilliance, Rosa Park's social conscience and Oprah Winfrey's determination. But constructing an 'empowered female identity' based solely on the 'feminist icons' of the capitalist world e.g., Madonna, Rihana, Hilary Clinton or Sheryl Sandberg may not get a global nod.  

To a certain extent, it appears as if feminism is becoming redundant, however, certain contemporary developments in geopolitics reveal that the notion may be reduced to a paradox  of sexual emancipation and objectification for the western women . But in the developing countries especially the Muslim world, the feminist tendency --- with a problematic understanding though --- is taking on. Look at the tide of rebellion rising high in the Middle East [in particular Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia] and Turkey. Be it Tahrir or Taqsim, Muslim women have shown tremendous political activism lately. Their struggle, however, is still steered by a patriarchal system and directed at marinating it.  

An ideological conflict, which recently erupted between the Ukrainian collective, FEMEN, and the Muslim Women Against FEMEN (MWAF), has brought the modern feminist dilemma to the spotlight once again. Both these groups claimed to be the 'real feminists' and crossed swords with each other. The MWAF initially started as a Facebook group. However, it shortly transformed into a resistance of all potential 'Muslim feminists' defending their religion and personal freedom to observe hijab against the naked aggression of  ‘white sextremsist FEMEN’ determined to launch a bare-bosomed crusade against Islamism. Two queer kinds of feminism pitched against each other.

Many view this confrontation more as an offshoot of the rising tension between Islamic and Western societies than two differing feminist standpoints. This tense polarity---  as the headscarves become popular among Muslim women, especially in France, ‘leading’ to hijab riots in July 2013, and Inna Schenkov's self-styled and well publicized ‘breast politics’ suggest --- is going to have some ramifications on the feminist ideas in the days to come. We may come across more Muslim feminists, moderate Muslim feminists, veiled-feminists or may be more divisions within the sex-positive and anti-porn feminists.

Both Muslim feminists (MWAF) and FEMEN expose the twisted notions  of women empowerment in two different societies . The Muslim women can be secular or liberal but relating Islam with feminism and hijab with liberation is as unconvincing as a democratic theocracy. The MWAF who term their veil a 'liberating symbol', may be justified in expressing anger at FEMEN but it did not represent the true feminist model which inherently clashes with Islamic ideology.  They can criticize, being champions of women rights, the west for its commodification of women but must not overlook how many Muslim women live, think, work or perform freely without having caused a furor over their personal choice.

Just like FEMEN cannot speak for all feminists, MWAF or other veil-endorsing Muslim feminists are not the sole voice of all Muslim women. Hijab might be a symbol of cultural resistance for Arab women but South Asian women never cared about this 'liberating piece of cloth' before the onslaught of Salafist culture in the region.

As far as FEMEN's manifesto of liberation --- emphasizing baring breasts to defy sexism, religious oppression or homophobia --- is concerned, it in itself appears sexist to many. In a world where women in thongs and corsets occupy the media and where celebrities intentionally go bottomless in front of paparazzi or upload naked pictures just to attract fan following how could one judge who is sexist and who is feminist?

One wonders what makes Inna Schenkov more feminists than German model Heidi Klum whose show was heckled by FEMEN leader Inna Schenkov'ssextremist’ topless friends for being too manipulative and objectifying young women?

If contemporary feminism is all about the punk hooliganism of Pussy Riot or condescending vandalism of  FEMEN like groups then one would be better off abandoning this idea. No denying the fact that masculine hegemony stems from religious conditioning yet one cannot root for vandalizing churches or hurling insults at those who don’t join topless protests or who wear hijab. An enlightened woman-feminist [or a non-feminist for that matter] really believing in equality for all, is compelled to distance herself from such an expression of  'feminism'. If women have been asking for respect, freedom and equality then they must learn to reciprocate such values with no matter which country, class, creed or race these ‘other’ belong to. And if a woman or a group of women fail to acknowledge this very basic fact, their claim to spearhead a feminist movement certainly falls flat as we notice in the case of FEMEN.

Answering a question about her chopping down a Cross in Kiev which most people termed highly offensive and provocative, Inna Schenkov said:  ‘I cannot tolerate intolerance…it was just a piece of wood that symbolizes blood and death’.

The FEMEN view or concern may have a reason but the approach towards women rights is utterly flawed and twisted. In the wake of global riots which broke out after a so-called anti-Islam movie (Innocence of Muslims), radical ventures (like topless protests) to engage an ultra-orthodox group appear childish and dangerous as well. Burning flags with 'Kalima'(that is sacred for many Muslims) written on it could have provoked the lunatics in Egypt, Pakistan, Libya or Afghanistan. In ‘revenge’, they could burn the churches or temples elsewhere.

It is not just women they are trying to convince rather a constantly clashing culture that is already skeptical about the West. Most of all one can't make head and tail of FEMEN's feminism which starts from anti-prostitution, turns to women poverty, shifts to anti-Islamism from anti-Putin and then goes back to using breasts as weapons against objectification of female body. One thing that remains unchanged is FEMEN protesters' prim and proper outlook.

From a purely radical feminist perspective, rallying bottomless men to challenge the taboos about female body may serve the purpose more than going topless yourself. Believe me bottomless men protesting against the objectification of women's body is just as radical or ridiculous as topless female jihad.

Duriya Hashmi is a passive activist, blogger and aspiring film maker who writes to vent anguish and believes in art as a catalyst for change. Her cyber self can be followed at