Interrogating
Muslim Masculinities?
by A.J. Caschetta
Jihad Watch
November 4, 2014
Be the first of
your friends to like this.
On September 18, 2014, the day that Yemen-born Mufid Elfghee, also
known as the "Rochester
man," was indicted
in federal court for being an ISIS recruiter, the University of Rochester
hosted a lecture with the intriguing title, "Interrogating Islamic
Masculinities." The flyer for University of Miami assistant
professor Amanullah
De Sondy's lecture stated:
Rigid notions of masculinity are causing crisis [sic] in the global
Islamic community. These are articulated from the Qu'ran, its commentary,
historical precedents and societal, religious and familial obligations. This
lecture will interrogate this global gender and sexual crisis as we
attempt to understand Islam and Muslims in the world today.
The juxtaposition of Elfghee's indictment and De Sondy's lecture is an
apt emblem of the profession's increasing insularity and abandonment of
the American public. While radicals recruit their fellow Americans to
join a murderous, misogynistic army dedicated to ethnically cleansing
much of the Middle East under the banner of a restored Caliphate, Middle
East studies professors continue their decades-long descent into
politicized and trivial scholarship.
An actual "interrogation" of Islamic concepts of the
masculine holds great potential for understanding current events: the
psycho-sexual angst of the ISIS
beheaders; homosexuality among the ostensibly homophobic Taliban;
the phenomenon of "honor
killings" among Muslim communities; the rash of child sexual
exploitation by Pakistani
men in the town of Rotherham, England; the confused sexual ambiguity
of jihadi
rapists.
Yet appearances can deceive, and it quickly became clear that De Sondy
would pose no challenging questions, nor would he defy the political
correctness that he and other conformists depend on for acceptance,
tenure, and grant money. Instead, to a very sparse audience of five
faculty members and fourteen students, he proffered an obligatory
critique of the West, which De Sondy claimed is "capable only of
cardboard cut-out stereotypes of Islam"; an equally-requisite praise
of Edward Said's discredited,
anti-Western ideology on colonialism and "Orientalism"; and
evasion of topics that cast Islam in a negative light, a characteristic
of far too much Western academic writing—for example: "The Koran is
a perfectly ambiguous, disjointed text. It can say whatever you want it
to say."
De Sondy used the term "political Islam," although he seemed
to believe it was invented by Jamaat-i-Islami founder Sayyid Abu al
Mawdudi (1903-1979). His apologia for Mawdudi included the claim that he
"was reacting against colonial powers" and that
"imprisonment made him more religious." In truth, as founder of
a terrorist group, Mawdudi deserves some, though certainly not
all, of the blame for the surge of militant Islam in the twentieth
century. Ultimately De Sondy failed to explore the roots of Mawdudi's
ideas or to acknowledge that Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, is the
primary model for Islamic masculinity and Islamic gender relations.
Indeed, he focused more attention on the Old Testament figures of Adam
and Joseph than on Muhammad.
De Sondy's brief foray into "Muslim Feminist Hermeneutics"
was a near-incoherent mixture of jargon and accusation. He argued that
Muslim feminist critics such as Amina
Wadud, Asma Barlas, and Asra Nomani are incapable of seeing
"through their own hetero-normative experiences" in "the
failed search for a single Koranic masculinity."
The Q&A portion consisted mainly of faculty members trying to fill
the uncomfortable silence with comments. The only student who
participated, a young woman, noted that all of De Sondy's examples of
feminist Muslims live in the West where they can write without fearing
for their lives. She then asked him to explain the widespread abuse
endured by women in the Muslim world. Momentarily shaken, De Sondy
claimed, incredibly, that "a lot of women are happy with the
patriarchal model." Before anyone could object, he was saved by a
faculty member who claimed falsely, "when they have a chance to
vote, Muslims simply don't vote for Islamists." This Middle East
specialist was apparently unaware that Recip Tayyip Erdogan and his
Islamist AK Party have been winning elections in Turkey
since 2002, steadily whittling away the nation's Kemalist secularism;
that Hamas swept the 2006 elections in Gaza;
and that Muslim Brotherhood candidate Mohamed Morsi won Egypt's
2012 presidential election.
In stark contrast to the important Rochester news of the day, De
Sondy's lecture on "Islamic masculinities" epitomized a common
and unfortunate Liberal Arts proclivity for examining trivial matters in
great detail while missing—either by ignoring or avoiding—far more
significant ones. It also poignantly illustrated what Martin
Kramer has described as the field's "cultivation of
irrelevance" whereby "the new mandarins" overseeing Middle
Eastern studies have "rejected the idea of objective standards,
disguised the vice of politicization as the virtue of commitment, and
replaced proficiency with ideology." Nothing at this event
contradicted Kramer's decade-old description.
A.J. Caschetta is a Senior Lecturer at the Rochester Institute of
Technology and a Fellow of the Middle East Forum. He can be reached at
ajcgsl@rit.edu. This
article was written for Campus
Watch, a project of the Middle
East Forum.
This
text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an
integral whole with complete and accurate information provided about its
author, date, place of publication, and original URL.
Related Items
|
No comments:
Post a Comment