Rachel's Week 4 Blog Post

The readings for this week reveal the new face of Orientalism. One of the tasks of Orientalism as we described it before was to define "The Orient." This new form of Orientalism defines women based on their victim status. It paints the women of the Middle East as uniformly in need of saving. It does not take into account that experiences vary between countries, cultures, classes and individual women. Instead, the modern Orientalism carried out by some Western feminist writers relies on broad generalizations that represent the third world woman as inferior, oppressed and without voice.

Lila Abu-Lughod describes this generalization. "There was the blurring of the very seperate causes in Afghanistan of women's continuing malnutrition, poverty, and ill health, and their more recent exclusion under the Taliban from employment, schooling, and the joys of wearing nail polish" (Abu-Lughod 784). Here, the practice of some Western feminists to view the experience of third world women as a single experience, sharing the same causes and attributes is described. Chandra Mohanty's writing reveals her view of Western feminist generalizations by her treatment of the word "the." In many sentences, the word "the" is put in quotes or italicized. An example of this is found on page 76 of Mohanty's work: "For example, how is it possible to refer to 'the' sexual division of labour when the context of this division changes radically from one environment to the next, and from one historical juncture to another?" (Mohanty 76). Her treatment of "the" here shows her beliefs on the ridiculousness of thinking there can be "the" anything. The word "the" suggests that there is one singular thing- one singular division of labor, one singular third world woman experience. By challenging use of the word "the" Mohanty brings attention to the presence and failure of generalizations.

Discussion of the veil serves as a telling example of the broad generalizations relied upon by some Western feminist writers. Western feminists seem to view the veil as an object possessing one singular and oppressive function. However, Lila Abu-Lughod says, "Not only are there many forms of covering, which themselves have different meanings in the communities in which they are used, but also veiling itself must not be confused with, or made to stand for, lack of agency" (Abu-Lughod 786). In her discussion of feminism and Islam in Egypt, Abu-Lughod goes on to say, "Adopting the hijab now has an extraordinary number of meanings and complications that need to be distinguished" (Abu-Lughod 250). Chandra Mohanty also describes the Western Feminist tendency to view the veil in only one specific way. The veil is a multifaceted item that has an extensive number of meanings and connotations, yet many Western Feminists treat it as a universal symbol for oppression. Mohanty and Lila Abu-Lughod both conclude by saying that no change can be reached until cultural and historical specificity is recognized.