Value of Money in Arab Communities - Essay Example

Money is an important life necessity required for human survival especially in a world where everyone talks by the language of currency in order to meet their needs. Indeed, the greater the value of the money the more protection will be provided to the money, which is similar to the way females are treated in some Arab communities. A huge number of Arab males identify females as a valuable personal object that requires protection and security from others as she represents family honor. However, she is also considered less relevant when it comes to expressing her opinion and feelings especially when living in a patriarchal society that view males as the source of control. In most cases, males ignore a female’s opinion and role yet they are allowed to use her as they wished by forcing her to get married to others or requiring her to do certain tasks without seeking her approval. Not only that, but when those females disagree and disobey the orders, which are the male’s orders in this case, or they tried to escape, they are exposed to serious threats such as honor killing because of the fear that they would ruin the family reputation. If I could go back in Time is a song that was produced by DAM, a Palestinian hip-hop band. The song is about the tragedy of a young Arab girl who was killed by her brother under the father’s supervision. Indeed, the girl was forced to an arranged marriage that pushed her to escape. However, her mother found out before the girl ran away and told her father and brother, who rushed in killing her to protect the honor of the family and prevent her from shaming the family’s name. The song received several positive and negative critiques from the people. However, the band replied to one of the critiques that they found both unpleasant and insulting, which was received from Lila Abu Lughad and Maya Mikdashi. The two expressed their opinion on their shock with the production of the song that expressed women rights from a cultural perspective rather than a political lens. Lila Abu Lughad and Maya Mikdashi commented on the song by indicating their disappointment with the idea of the song that indicated that violence against women in the Palestinian societies is merely rooted in culture and tradition. Indeed, Abu Lughad and Mikdashi indicated that the song only blamed culture and traditions and that it is the reason for using violence against women, when there are many other reasons that can escalate violence against women that were ignored by the band such as the economic and political condition and the most important issue of the Israeli occupation. In fact, Abu-Lughod and Mikdashi pointed out that ignoring these reasons is like ignoring the work of many feminist scholars and activists that are fighting against violence against women because DAM limited the reason for violence to cultural reasons while ignoring political reasons. Furthermore, Abu Lughad and Mikdashi noted the song’s lyric claimed that the girl wanted freedom from her family because by forcing her to get married. Indeed, Abu-Lughod and Mikdashi illustrated that Palestinian women are seeking for freedom, but not from their families instead from the violence and power of colonialism and state. In other words, the two authors believe that DAM are focusing on minor issues such as forced marriages and culture instead of focusing on the wider and core issues such as political violence against women. Abu-Lughod and Mikdashi also argued that DAM failed to address the plight of Palestine girls and how powerful they were as many of them engaged in political discussion and events, struggled with going to school, challenged the police, stood up for humiliating and exercised patience. Instead, DAM’s words identified the Palestinian women as victims of the family and a naive society. Indeed, DAM’s opened more doors for Western to focus on inner issues that escalate violence in the Palestine communities, which display these communities as uncivilized and aggressive since they ignore the major concept of struggle and violence to those women, which is colonization. Abu-Lughod and Mikdashi also pointed that accepting funds from the UN shows support for the settlers especially when the song’s video support their purpose. DAM replied to arguments by explaining that the song captured a widespread phenomenon revolving around the idea of honor killing not only in the Palestinian land but in many other parts of the world such as Lebanon, Egypt and many other countries, where women are victims of honor killing and are seen as a disgrace to their family. Indeed, DAM pointed that they were aware of the different reasons that could lead to women violence but it were not accurate to view violence against women from a political perspective only because many countries do not suffer from the Israel occupation or any political struggle yet honor killing existed. In addition, DAM indicated that political, cultural and economic reasons are considered as one battle to them and isolating them would not provide any justice in presenting the issue. In addition, DAM illustrated that they did not ignore the work of feminism scholars because the video song itself included one of the known feminism activist Amal Murkus. DAM also responded to the arguments by illustrating that paying more attention to the domestic issues of violence against women in the Palestinian communities was very important and it was part of the political issue in the country as well. Indeed, DAM indicated that even though women suffered more from international political issues, it does not mean that the Palestinian domestic issues should be ignored and not discussed because of shame and fear of how the Western societies view the Palestine communities. Moreover, DAM clarified that the UN funding of the song’s video did not have any relation with the idea of the video since the video is based on a real story and the fact that many girls were victims. Indeed, DAM refused to work with any companies that were on the boycott list, and this is the reason behind their acceptance of UN funding in order to spread their message. When viewing both Abu-Lughod and Mikdashi and DAM’s arguments, DAM’s response to Abu-Lughod and Mikdashi provides more accurate argument and account for the reason of their choice to present the issue of honor killing. Abu-Lughod and Mikdashi reaction to the video is related to the way the BAOBAB for Women’s Human Rights organization acted on Amina Lawal case by posting a message requesting the public not to send messages about Amina Lawal case since it affected Ms.Lawal and the image of Islam by viewing it under different stereotypes. Nevertheless, DAM’s video song discussed the issue of honor killing in a sophisticated way without affecting the image of Palestinian societies. The video broke the complexity of the issue into a simple yet emotional and powerful way that the audience would be able to understand and identify the seriousness of the issue. The song’s video fails to send a message to the public and governments that give excuses to the murders of honor killing. This is similar to Article 340 of the Jordan Panel Code of 1960’s that was also imposed in the West Bank. Article 340 indicated that murders under honor killing are murders of passion and deserve less punishment than murders from other forms of crimes. As a result, DAM’s video works on spreading the message that there is no relationship between honor killing and women and that there should be an end for this disgraced act especially since many women are being killed even when they did not commit any act. For example, perhaps Hiyam, a Palestinian, was killed after calling out her neighbor for help once she saw a thief at her home. However, when her father entered the living room, he could not accept Hiyam’s account and ended up killing the pair despite the spirited defense from the mother  as she said that the day before Hiyam had asked her mother for a sanitary pad and she wondered how it could have happened. The issue of honor killings should not be ignored or disregarded because of the fear of shame and West’s perspective of the Palestine society. However, it should be introduced to the public in order to find a solution to solve the issue and spread social awareness and educate the public on the seriousness of the issue and remove the default view that women are considered guilty and shameful. Arab females are subjective to honor not only in Palestine, but also in many other parts of the world. DAM indicated in their response that violence against women by their families, by the settlers and the state are all considered as being one battle. In fact, in order to end the cycle of violence against women, one should view the source of violence from different perspectives. One cannot ignore the cultural issues and focus only on the political international issue such as the Israeli occupation, as it were the case by Abu-Lughod and Mikdashi, since many parts of the world does not suffer from Israeli occupation although women suffers from honor killing even in highly educated societies. A clear example would be Noor Almaleki who was a victim of honor killing by her father as she refused to get married to the man that her father had chosen for her. Indeed, what is different in Noor’s case than DAM’s video is the society where Noor lived. Noor and her family were living in Arizona, United States Arizona, they were well educated, and lived in a sophisticated neighborhood. In fact, Noor was living like any other American teenager, which her father disliked. Thus, Noor’s father thought that forcing her into marriage would solve the problem although he ended up with a bigger one that was shameful. Read More

 

Read More